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

SpaceX S-1

sec.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 404 posts

Re: SpaceX S-1

#131

Post by kentm »

bmau5 wrote: post #106
kentm wrote: post #54

SpaceX is incredibly exciting, but I was skeptical when XAI and Twitter were rolled into it. The S-1 here makes it even more disappointing. I did want a piece of SpaceX but the valuation here is pretty eye watering compared to the fundamentals. I don't think I can put my money into this, although I suspect it will still do gangbusters based on hype and momentum. Its also a real shame that SpaceX's competitors have no…

You'll get a piece regardless if you're in index funds, as they're being strong-armed into buying at this awful price

Its unfortunate that its being fast tracked and I'm really annoyed that NASDAQ is doing this. But I think that the impact should be relatively minimal, at least for the funds I hold. I really just find the transparent grift annoying.

Re: SpaceX S-1

#132

Post by aeternum »

runako wrote: post #5
Eldodi wrote: post #3

Crazy this company will IPO for >1B with such bad financials! That said, Starlink seems to be a real cash machine, not as good as ads but enough to support AI bets. 2025: - Revenue: $18.7B, up from $14.0B in 2024 - Operating loss: -$2.6B - Net loss: -$4.9B - Adjusted EBITDA: $6.6B - Operating cash flow: $6.8B - Capex: $20.7B Segment breakdown: - Starlink / Connectivity: $11.4B revenue, $4.4B operating income, $7.2B a…

The numbers overall are worse than I expected. I can't believe Serious People are talking about putting this in the market at a trilly. > Starlink seems to be a real cash machine It has been said more than once that Starlink financials cannot be analyzed apart from SpaceX financials. Very easy to move the launch costs from one entity to the other depending on whether it is more beneficial to show more revenue for Spa…

Looks like it's gonna be closer to 2 trilly

Re: SpaceX S-1

#133

Post by adampunk »

well_ackshually wrote: post #98
oskarkk wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

NASA mostly runs on SpaceX, so it depends if you consider ISS to be critical. But I wouldn't say it would be mind boggling.

Cool, nationalise SpaceX, reintegrate its costs into NASA, done. The US would never let its access to space be cut off.

Watch lmao.

Re: SpaceX S-1

#134

Post by hersko »

well_ackshually wrote: post #98
oskarkk wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

NASA mostly runs on SpaceX, so it depends if you consider ISS to be critical. But I wouldn't say it would be mind boggling.

Cool, nationalise SpaceX, reintegrate its costs into NASA, done. The US would never let its access to space be cut off.

The US actually did just that when it retired the shuttle program. We had to rely on Russia to get to the space station.

Re: SpaceX S-1

#135

Post by dbalatero »

ACCount37 wrote: post #130
dbalatero wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then why do they keep getting sued, then going one state over and running the same playbook that got them sued in the previous state? https://naacp.org/articles/naacp-sues-xai-illegal-pollution-...

[flagged]

Yes and both are getting sued? I wouldn't necessarily classify the NAACP as environmental activists, but they are concerned with the wellbeing of the people they represent.

Re: SpaceX S-1

#137

Post by tensor »

LanceJones wrote: post #100
TheAlchemist wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So be it. What's the alternative ? Continue a bubble ? Ride on the 'FSD by the end of the year' or 'thousands of Optimus next year' for the next 10 years ? The guys is openly lying and clearly a drug addict at this point and people think he's not cooking the books ? Musk empire will end up being a much bigger scandal than Enron ever was. It's just a matter of time until it unfolds.

The idea that 100s of global pension funds don't do their due diligence when investing 100s of millions or billions of their members' future retirement funds is extremely naive. With sincerity, I hope you can find a way not to be so emotional about what Musk says and be more grounded in what his companies and their employees are doing .

Investing in SpaceX is one thing. Investing in SpaceX that is now merged with several other failed companies that each incur massive yearly additional losses.... let's see how long those funds still hold SpaceX.

Re: SpaceX S-1

#138

Post by electriclove »

austhrow743 wrote: post #108
electriclove wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Did you read that Anthropic is paying them $15B/year for use of xAI's data centers? That changes things quite a bit

Does xAI have some sort of edge over Anthropic when it comes to buying future compute? If not, this just seems like grok not being as successful as they would have liked and then finding some other use for the compute they had bought for it while at the same time Anthropic can’t keep up with demand for claude.

Your second statement is correct IMO.

Re your first statement, the problem is that there isn't enough compute out there. xAI built their own data centers (and plan to built more -> in orbit). I don't think Anthropic has done that to the same extent and it seems like they will partner with multiple vendors who can provide the compute they need.

Re: SpaceX S-1

#139

Post by amluto »

runako wrote: post #5
Eldodi wrote: post #3

Crazy this company will IPO for >1B with such bad financials! That said, Starlink seems to be a real cash machine, not as good as ads but enough to support AI bets. 2025: - Revenue: $18.7B, up from $14.0B in 2024 - Operating loss: -$2.6B - Net loss: -$4.9B - Adjusted EBITDA: $6.6B - Operating cash flow: $6.8B - Capex: $20.7B Segment breakdown: - Starlink / Connectivity: $11.4B revenue, $4.4B operating income, $7.2B a…

The numbers overall are worse than I expected. I can't believe Serious People are talking about putting this in the market at a trilly. > Starlink seems to be a real cash machine It has been said more than once that Starlink financials cannot be analyzed apart from SpaceX financials. Very easy to move the launch costs from one entity to the other depending on whether it is more beneficial to show more revenue for Spa…

The use of EBITDA for Starlink is also interesting. For something like terrestrial fiber, I can imagine thinking that there’s a lot of depreciation on the books, but that most of the equipment keeps working after the depreciation period or is cheaper to replace than it was to buy, and that the right of ways and attachments don’t really depreciate. But Starlink satellites are actually gone at the end of their useful life.

I have not dug into the filing to see how this really breaks down.

Re: SpaceX S-1

#140

Post by huevosabio »

runako wrote: post #5
Eldodi wrote: post #3

Crazy this company will IPO for >1B with such bad financials! That said, Starlink seems to be a real cash machine, not as good as ads but enough to support AI bets. 2025: - Revenue: $18.7B, up from $14.0B in 2024 - Operating loss: -$2.6B - Net loss: -$4.9B - Adjusted EBITDA: $6.6B - Operating cash flow: $6.8B - Capex: $20.7B Segment breakdown: - Starlink / Connectivity: $11.4B revenue, $4.4B operating income, $7.2B a…

The numbers overall are worse than I expected. I can't believe Serious People are talking about putting this in the market at a trilly. > Starlink seems to be a real cash machine It has been said more than once that Starlink financials cannot be analyzed apart from SpaceX financials. Very easy to move the launch costs from one entity to the other depending on whether it is more beneficial to show more revenue for Spa…

The space launch operating loss is like 10% of the Starlink operating income.

So Starlink is a cash cow!

Post reply on HN