561–570 of 1001 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
P/E is price to earning. Price to revenue is P/S. AER's P/S is like 3, so the discrepancy is much worse than you think. Sidenote: 3 is actually high. 94 is absolutely ridiculous.
> Sidenote: 3 is actually high. Do you mean low? AAPL has a ps of 10.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Start gradually converting your equity to bonds is the standard advice on that timeframe. If you're dreading equity drawdowns, that's what fixed income is for.
This is absolutely terrible advice and is out of touch with modern financial understanding. Bonds feel psychologically safer, but lead to failure more often than total market equity portfolios, even when you account for market crashes. https://youtu.be/p25PPBgMiEk
So I disagree that "If you're dreading equity drawdowns, that's what fixed income is for" is absolutely terrible advice.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well, the value of the stock for people who essentially do not have any meaningful control of the business must essentially be tied to the expectation of some liquidity event down the line -- future cash flows. So this could come in the form of dividends, sale of the stock, bankruptcy proceedings, or a purchase of the business. If I knew for certain (big if) that a business would never have a liquidity event and I co…
But you can transfer your ownership.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Sidenote: 3 is actually high. Do you mean low? AAPL has a ps of 10.
Nothing about Apple is representative of a normal business.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
SpaceX is valued at that revenue multiple because of its expected revenue growth rate. This deal is part of that revenue growth. So the new revenue would be already partially or even fully priced-in. Perhaps it reduces uncertainty around the growth rate, but expectations were already sky-high, as shown by the multiple!
A cynic might wonder given Musk's implausible trajectory and questionable associations whether the X project is primarily a grift and/or money laundering project that happens to do high-profile tech, and the primary aim is to pump the stock and hope some other opportunity to pump it further arrives in the future. Otherwise a dump works too. There's plenty of money to be made from carefully timed shorting. The entire…
This is a masterful piece of financial engineering by Google and SpaceX. Google purchased 10% of SpaceX over a decade ago. After dilution they probably own around 5%. SpaceX is valued at a whopping 94x revenue. This deal increases SpaceX's revenue by $11 billion per year. If SpaceX maintains this revenue multiplier, then this single deal boosts SpaceX's valuation by 94 x 11 billion = $1 trillion dollars. Google owns…
This isn’t how valuations work. The PE ratio isn’t fixed. It doesn’t scale with revenue. It’s based on projected future growth. This kind of deal is expected, meaning this deal likely won’t move SpaceX’s market cap much. Certainly not by anywhere close to $1T. That’s +60% of the entire pre-IPO market cap.
Google is doing this because they need more compute and TSMC is booked out for years.
> $920 million per month from October 2026 through June 2029 for access to “approximately 110,000 NVIDIA GPUs, CPUs, memory, and other related components. That's about $8,400/month per "component" is that in the ballpark at all with what a month of dedicated/exclusive access to an NVIDIA GPU would go for?
That's roughly 11.66$ per hour per GPU, which is above the price that Google Cloud is reselling them at if you commit for 36 months: https://getdeploying.com/gpus/nvidia-b200
[1] Probably, there could be undisclosed clusters owned by other companies.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That is one of the columns. The headline makes my point succinctly. Your paraphrase of the column misses the crucial point. A Nasdaq index fund doesn’t buy a company unless it is in the Nasdaq. Under the old rules SPCEX was ineligible for listing. Now Nasdaq index funds all have to buy. Index funds by nature do not selectively buy stocks, if the stock is in the index, they buy, that’s their mandate. That’s the game,…
[flagged]
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There are many Not In My Orbit people on this very page. Many current national politicians would be happy to vote AI out of orbit today. Space is not an escape from earthly politics.
> Space is not an escape from earthly politics. Well, Earth orbit isn't.
Is this the same Memphis data center notorious for burning jet fuel nonstop for power?