Live data from Hacker News

SpaceX S-1

sec.gov

151–160 of 404 posts

Re: SpaceX S-1

#151

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]

[deleted]

Re: SpaceX S-1

#152
post #51

If any company can put profitable data centers in space, it will be SpaceX. But I doubt that any company can. The difficulties of the physics and engineering of cooling seem like they will always outweigh the advantages of keeping your data center on Earth. I am annoyed by the insistence that the value of this company comes from something that no one has been able to show is possible yet without multiplying it by the…

The unit economics of orbital DC just doesn't work with today's technology. Assuming 0 ongoing OpEx(free energy), the launch cost of the satellite itself, along with solar panels, radiators as well as the chip themselves just doesn't make sense given the ~5 year operational lifespan of both the chips and the satellites.

Re: SpaceX S-1

#153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Starlink is giving away the satellite dishes for free to grow customers. These dishes are expensive to manufacture and cost the company hundreds of dollars each. The estimated manufacturing cost of a Starlink standard dish is around $400.

Which is a fine thing to say, but CAC vs LTV (customer acquisition cost vs lifetime value of the customer) is the underlying equation. If it costs them $150 to give away a dish, but they get, say, $300 before the user churns, they still come out ahead.

By making a lot of antennae, they also lower their price in the future due to the learning curve.

Re: SpaceX S-1

#154
post #51

If any company can put profitable data centers in space, it will be SpaceX. But I doubt that any company can. The difficulties of the physics and engineering of cooling seem like they will always outweigh the advantages of keeping your data center on Earth. I am annoyed by the insistence that the value of this company comes from something that no one has been able to show is possible yet without multiplying it by the…

This: "I do not want my pension to automatically buy shares at $1T, but it looks like it will have no choice."

They know the game very well. They know that if they manage to pump up the valuation high enough - they will be automatic money flowing in - regardless of actual valuations.

Re: SpaceX S-1

#155

"We do not anticipate declaring or paying any cash dividends to holders of our common stock in the foreseeable future." Sounds like 'never' to me.

Growth companies not paying dividends is normal and they're likely many years out from when they'd need to seriously consider it. I don't think thats a big deal.

Re: SpaceX S-1

#156

So this confirms that SpaceX was making a lot of cash and plowing it back into R&D, and that the X/Twitter/xAI merger is concrete shoes on the good parts.

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

[deleted]

Re: SpaceX S-1

#157
post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

When do we call AI bubble? Like 2 trillion value and losing billions.

Re: SpaceX S-1

#158

"in May 2026, we entered into Cloud Services Agreements with Anthropic PBC (“Anthropic”), an AI research and development public benefit corporation, with respect to access to compute capacity across COLOSSUS and COLOSSUS II. Pursuant to these agreements, the customer has agreed to pay us $1.25 billion per month through May 2029, with capacity ramping in May and June 2026 at a reduced fee" Anthropic is paying them 1.2…

The whole AI world really is completely circular spending where every one loses money along the way. The only one really making any money is Nvidia.

Re: SpaceX S-1

#159
post #16
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…

Starlink is a cash machine because the costs are externalised to the rest of the company, all in it's a money pit.

SpaceX itself wouldn't be that bad, it's the xAI. It's going to burn through cash.

I remember Josh Brown talking about Peleton after its IPO: "Great Product, Horrible Investment"

Re: SpaceX S-1

#160
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…

SpaceX would be an interesting IPO without XAI. It is hemorrhaging money and is in what, 6th place in the AI race while hemorrhaging X subscribers every month. Theoretically the company could focus on what is profitable and be strong fundamental company, but this is Elon we are talking about he is going to do whatever he wants to do.
Post reply on HN