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

161–170 of 404 posts

Re: SpaceX S-1

#161

Post by stingraycharles »

sdwr wrote: post #142
keeda wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Whoa. I've said before, but I think Dario severely underestimated the coming demand and ensuing need for compute, and would need to pay through the nose when the crunch hit. I suspect that Google deal also worked out better for Google. This data point supports that view. While Altman got laughed out of the room as a "podcasting bro" asking for trillions in investment in compute, Dario was going on about how difficult…

They have different personalities. I can only imagine Altman wants to stay on top of the chaos, and believes he will come out ahead whatever happens, while Dario is trying to stay realistic and mitigate worst-case scenarios.

Being drowned in demand and scrambling for compute because you’re more successful than anticipated is a better problem than the other way around.

Re: SpaceX S-1

#162

Post by impulser_ »

denimnerd42 wrote: post #63
impulser_ wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well Colossus 1 has 230k GPUs, including 30k GB200s and Colossus 2 has 550k GB200s & GB300s. So my guess on costs would be like ~$10B for Colossus 1, and Colossus 2 would be like ~20b.

a GB300 rack is like 5-6 million so seems a bit low.

Yeah, maybe these aren't good guesses. I was basing it off CapEx and Elon's tweet about them. Maybe C2 isn't completely filled yet.

Re: SpaceX S-1

#163

Post by kurthr »

etempleton wrote: post #158
impulser_ wrote: post #15

"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.

Except that they're loaning a bunch of money to their "customers" to "buy" their products. It's still really circular.

Re: SpaceX S-1

#164

Post by etempleton »

kurthr wrote: post #163
etempleton wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Except that they're loaning a bunch of money to their "customers" to "buy" their products. It's still really circular.

This thing is going to explode. From this I have to imagine OpenAIs numbers are also going to be much worse than people imagine / what has been shared.

Re: SpaceX S-1

#165

Post by kentm »

etempleton wrote: post #160
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…

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.

To be honest, it could be one with XAi too. Im no fan of Musk and Grok but the deal with Anthropic pointed out by other contributors isn't nothing. And I don't think SpaceX losing money at this stage isn't quite the problem that people think it is -- as someone who as worked at companies losing money and then going on to make quite a bit. Revenue growth is there.

The issue is that none of this is really worth $2T now. Yes, you might expect that SpaceX could launch Starship, build space-based datacenters, get a good foothold on the AI market, and grow Twitter. But you don't want to pay for future performance now, you want it to be discounted because you're taking on the risk that those things don't happen. $2T feels like expecting that story has already been actualized.

Re: SpaceX S-1

#166

Post by btian »

etempleton wrote: post #158
impulser_ wrote: post #15

"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.

How is SpaceX not making money?

Total investment is 20-40B, rent to Anthropic for 45B over 3 years.

Anthropic is also profitable now.

Re: SpaceX S-1

#167

Post by urams »

dmix wrote: post #79
darkwizard42 wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just to keep things in perspective, Uber IPO-ed for 82.4B. SpaceX is IPOing for over 10x more.

Plus Uber's only increased their revenue 11->14B in the last 5yrs. SpaceX has added +$4B since 2024 and have fanciful plans in multiple markets that only a gambler like Musk would risk proposing.

> Plus Uber's only increased their revenue 11->14B in the last 5yrs.

This is just incredibly off. A brief look at Yahoo Finance shows revenue has grown from $31.9B in 2022 -> $53.7B in trailing 12mos.

Re: SpaceX S-1

#168

Post by etempleton »

kentm wrote: post #165
etempleton wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

To be honest, it could be one with XAi too. Im no fan of Musk and Grok but the deal with Anthropic pointed out by other contributors isn't nothing. And I don't think SpaceX losing money at this stage isn't quite the problem that people think it is -- as someone who as worked at companies losing money and then going on to make quite a bit. Revenue growth is there. The issue is that none of this is really worth $2T now…

The deal with Anthropic gives me more pause about the whole market. More circular spending. They are all propping each other up making it look like they have more revenue than they really have. I think Open AIs S-1 will be just as crazy. I don't think there is any rationality or plan to all of this. AI doesn't pay for itself. It won't for a very long time.

Re: SpaceX S-1

#169

Post by Imustaskforhelp »

malfist wrote: post #116
vardump wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I just can't, can't wait until this whole Musk fugazzi finally blows up. Be careful what you wish for. The collateral damage would be mind boggling.

Spacex is not too big to fail.

Yes but only if its added before the index funds. Let's just hope that the nasdaq and the other markets just don't take spacex (Nasdaq is literally bending its rules to accodomate SpaceX)

The worst thing is that we don't even have a say in all of this and chances are most likely that its gonna IPO and get listed on the index funds soon and once it gets into Index funds, a lot of collateral damage might happen.

I must say that I am not quite optimistic about there not existing collateral damage, there is happening a lot of corruption within financial markets in general with bending laws. The worst part is that we all would/might be the most impacted by it all

Re: SpaceX S-1

#170

Post by etempleton »

btian wrote: post #166
etempleton wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

How is SpaceX not making money? Total investment is 20-40B, rent to Anthropic for 45B over 3 years. Anthropic is also profitable now.

Anthropic is not profitable and does not expect to be revenue even until 2028. They are just losing less billions per year than everyone else.
Post reply on HN