Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

SpaceX files to go public

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

401–410 of 631 posts

Re: SpaceX files to go public

#401

Post by ramon156 »

WalterBright wrote: post #395
datsci_est_2015 wrote: post #320

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The ocean floor is more habitable than Mars. The asteroid belt likely contains more easily-obtained rare metals that also don’t have to escape Mars’ terminal velocity. Reading a comment like the grandparent’s while we’re surrounded by many tangible crises on earth is sickening. Especially many of them manufactured by the same man who the grandparent comment seems to deify (DOGE AIDS funding). Anyway, I find myself fe…

Human problems are generally unsolvable, no matter how much money is spent on them.

Where's your defense? I know nihilism is hot, but this just seems like reverse copium

Re: SpaceX files to go public

#402

Post by laughing_man »

jaccola wrote: post #373
hattmall wrote: post #284

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Amazon Leo just signed delta as a customer so competition is indeed close behind. I think SpaceX is an incredible company but at this valuation I’d expect it to have something as pervasive as the iPhone or Nvidia chips. It seems to have only small niches.

But you're just looking at internet.

SpaceX has the lion's share of the world's launch market, if you include Starlink.

https://x.com/FutureJurvetson/status/2038811249232732275

Re: SpaceX files to go public

#403

Post by laughing_man »

raw_anon_1111 wrote: post #304
pnw wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

Absolutely no one said that.

There were a lot of people back in the early '90s who thought cell service would never be widely adopted because of the cost. It was clear you didn't need a mobile phone -- we'd all gotten long just fine without one.

Re: SpaceX files to go public

#404

Post by calvinsun1102 »

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…

70% is way too high.

Re: SpaceX files to go public

#405

Post by tristanj »

jaccola wrote: post #378
tristanj wrote: post #311

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

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.

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.

Re: SpaceX files to go public

#406

Post by laughing_man »

keeda wrote: post #295
indoordin0saur wrote: post #113

SpaceX has reduced the cost of getting a ton of mass into orbit by a factor of 10 and with their new system (Starship) it's poised further reduce that to 100x. They launch, land and re-use their rockets so often now that what was considered impossible 15 years ago is now routine. They currently put more things into space than the rest of the world combined and by a huge margin. They also have the most advanced intern…

Their technical accomplishments are doubtlessly notable, but does the expected business growth justify this valuation? Honest question, how many things do we really need to send up there that reducing the cost to orbit by 100x will trigger Jevon's paradox and lead to 100x more launches? I suppose "data centers in space" is the current answer but again, I'm suspicious about its feasibility. Barring that, until we have…

Starlink seems like a no-brainer at this late date, but I remember thinking "He'll never be able to make money from internet satellites. This has to be some kind of scam. Look what happened to Irridium."

Data centers in orbit certainly seem like a pipe dream, but SpaceX certainly has the technology it needs to put them there, and that's a huge competitive advantage (like it was for Starlink) if they do turn out to be feasible.

Re: SpaceX files to go public

#407

Post by consp »

tristanj wrote: post #311
plaidfuji wrote: post #283

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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 ho…

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.

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.

Re: SpaceX files to go public

#408

Post by locallost »

sakagami0 wrote: post #361
superjan wrote: post #39

Patrick Boyle (fund manager, professor, youtuber) recently discussed this IPO on his channel. Informative and entertaining. https://youtu.be/8rS3fTbC7TE?is=TGpEdM2Y7sknP-cW

I used to watch him a lot, but he started talking about AI (I work at a big lab) and it was all wrong, so I'm not sure if I can trust his analysis anymore :(

He packages things to present them as analytical, but it's really just click bait for people to hear something they want to hear. He did a take over a year ago on why the EV revolution crashed with such gems as presenting less growth (but still growth) as lower sales. The comment section was full of never EV crowd who got their fix that everything will be alright and that nothing will change. Of course a year later there were booming sales worldwide.

The sad reality I'm coming to realize is that there is very little real and quality analysis, critical but with open eyes on the future. Most of it is just pandering to crowds. The war in Iran is the latest example - you have one side saying Iran is almost done, and the other that they're winning. Who's right? Doesn't matter, being correct is not the point.

Re: SpaceX files to go public

#409

Post by walthamstow »

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.

Building those colonies involved a lot of slavery and forced or indentured labour.

Re: SpaceX files to go public

#410

Post by pnw »

hattmall wrote: post #286
pnw wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

McKinsey estimated the global market for cellphones would be 900,000 units in 2000.

They were off by 100 million.

Even until the 90s some telcos believed that cell usage would never eclipse landlines which would remain the base of their business. It sounds ridiculous today because cell numbers outnumber landlines almost ten to one and have been dominant for over two decades.

Post reply on HN