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

We Think the SpaceX IPO Is Overvalued

morningstar.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 301 posts

Re: We Think the SpaceX IPO Is Overvalued

#71

Post by outside1234 »

oldfuture wrote: post #15

And the prospectus says it plainly: "Mr. Musk will be able to control the outcome of matters requiring shareholder approval." Musk holds over 85% voting power through Class B super-voting shares (10 votes/share). Public investors combined will have 15%. What Musk Controls: - CEO removal = his consent. You can't fire him even if he destroys the company - Take business for himself. SpaceX gets a rocket deal? Musk can s…

It is seriously baffling to me who is going to buy shares in this with 1) this structure and 2) at this valuation.

And it is a LOT of money that he is floating ($77B) so there have to be dumb people at scale for this to work.

Re: We Think the SpaceX IPO Is Overvalued

#72

Post by nine_k »

hparadiz wrote: post #66
SwellJoe wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It also achieved Musk's actual goal: derailing and delaying mass transit initiatives, the California High-speed Rail project, in particular. He knew it was bullshit. He's dumber than most people realize, but he's not dumb enough to actually believe all the bullshit he spouts.

He's sending the weirdest mixed signals. If we want to hit anywhere near 1 on the Kardashev scale we're gonna need a planet wide high speed rail system. They should just give the major tech companies naming rights to the stations for 35 years for like 2-3 billion a pop and scale up construction 5x. I don't get the slow roll on this thing. The stations in LA and SF are gonna end up sort of like Tokyo station for the S…

> Why isn't this thing done yesterday?

Land rights. Environmental reviews. Various suits attempting to exert extra compensations for tangential (at best) issues. Basically the California around.

Re: We Think the SpaceX IPO Is Overvalued

#73

Post by [deleted] »

verandaguy wrote: post #59
oldfuture wrote: post #15

And the prospectus says it plainly: "Mr. Musk will be able to control the outcome of matters requiring shareholder approval." Musk holds over 85% voting power through Class B super-voting shares (10 votes/share). Public investors combined will have 15%. What Musk Controls: - CEO removal = his consent. You can't fire him even if he destroys the company - Take business for himself. SpaceX gets a rocket deal? Musk can s…

This should frankly be disqualifying for any company trying to go public. Super voting shares have their place but there's no scenario in which overall control of the company can be retained by super voting shareholders who make up a small minority of the overall shareholders. The point of a company going public is not to just distribute possible profits among speculators, but to give the public a meaningful voice in…

[deleted]

Re: We Think the SpaceX IPO Is Overvalued

#74

Post by outside1234 »

tananaev wrote: post #30
epistasis wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let's go check on the cautionary tales of the Tesla shorts.... poor folks, we let them run around in the yard of the asylum without a fence because they have lost the motivation even to run away. They just keep mumbling about PE ratios....

It doesn't mean it's a good investment. It's just a personality cult. I suspect it might take a generation or more to settle on some reasonable price.

The next time there is a real correction all of these “concept cult” stocks are going to get hammered.

“When the tide goes out we will find out who has no shorts on.”

Re: We Think the SpaceX IPO Is Overvalued

#75

Post by themafia »

SwellJoe wrote: post #48
pryce wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I feel like we are going to relive the hyperloop-decline with the specs of proposed orbital datacentres. But the hyperloop was in one regard a success, in that it built temporary hype. Maybe it was even named after that.

It also achieved Musk's actual goal: derailing and delaying mass transit initiatives, the California High-speed Rail project, in particular. He knew it was bullshit. He's dumber than most people realize, but he's not dumb enough to actually believe all the bullshit he spouts.

> the California High-speed Rail project

The state government of California was doing a bang up job of destroying this project on their own. He didn't really need to help them. Moreover given the rise of remote work I'm not sure it has as much value as it would have had it been constructed when it was designed.

> but he's not dumb enough to actually believe all the bullshit he spouts.

Yet he's not afraid of the consequences either. This seems more telling to me.

Re: We Think the SpaceX IPO Is Overvalued

#76

Post by ianburrell »

hparadiz wrote: post #66
SwellJoe wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It also achieved Musk's actual goal: derailing and delaying mass transit initiatives, the California High-speed Rail project, in particular. He knew it was bullshit. He's dumber than most people realize, but he's not dumb enough to actually believe all the bullshit he spouts.

He's sending the weirdest mixed signals. If we want to hit anywhere near 1 on the Kardashev scale we're gonna need a planet wide high speed rail system. They should just give the major tech companies naming rights to the stations for 35 years for like 2-3 billion a pop and scale up construction 5x. I don't get the slow roll on this thing. The stations in LA and SF are gonna end up sort of like Tokyo station for the S…

Planet wide high speed rail doesn't make much sense, it is better of medium sized trips. Flights are will always be better for intercontinental trips. Vacuum trains could be faster but would be so expensive to build. Issues would be big deal in evacuated tunnels.

CA HSR is slow partly because the state government has limited funds and giving out slowly. The federal government should have been contributing more. The other problem is it kept getting delayed from legal issues, mainly from acquiring land. Going forward is bad because they decided to do the easy part first and leave the hard tunnels for later.

Re: We Think the SpaceX IPO Is Overvalued

#77

Post by credit_guy »

adgjlsfhk1 wrote: post #19
credit_guy wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Let's say Starship can put 100-150 tonnes into orbit per launch, that is somewhere between 40-65 launches for just one single orbital data center. Ok. And why does it follow from this that the physics of an orbital data center makes no sense?

Because 50 rocket launches seems hard to make cheaper than a building.

Why? It seems to me to be much cheaper than a building. Musk's aim is for the cost of one Starship launch to be under $10 million in the long run. 50 rocket launches would be less than half a billion dollars. Can you get a datacenter built on the ground for half a billion dollars?

Re: We Think the SpaceX IPO Is Overvalued

#78

Post by themafia »

darth_avocado wrote: post #67
bayarearefugee wrote: post #3

> We Think the SpaceX IPO Is Overvalued Well... yeah, sure, everyone thinks that. And the fact that it doesn't matter and won't impact demand for shares illustrates how increasingly and dangerously untethered the stock market is from reality.

> And the fact that it doesn't matter and won't impact demand for shares illustrates how increasingly and dangerously untethered the stock market is from reality. Part of the reason for this demand is the fact that index tracking funds like QQQ will be forced to buy up massive volumes of shares. Not only that but other non index tracking funds that track large cap stocks will also have to buy. Vanguard large cap for…

Does this not follow from the basic 401k structure in this country? Most people will be defaulted into a fund like Vanguard and from what I can gather from my co-workers, none of them are particularly wild about taking their retirement money and playing the day trading casino to try to increase their performance.

It's better than what preceded it but we still manage retirement wealth poorly.

Re: We Think the SpaceX IPO Is Overvalued

#79

Post by NathanKP »

verandaguy wrote: post #44

I need to understand what possible benefit there is to doing DCs in space. The cost would be, no pun intended, fucking astronomical. The cooling situation would make no sense at all -- the major up-and-coming application of DCs, LLM training, has absurd cooling requirements even here on earth where convective cooling is an option, to the point where many DCs use open-loop cooling. Latency might be better, in some cas…

It's easy to see the benefit in DC's in space if you look at a few ingredients:

1. The recent Iran drone attacks on AWS data centers

2. Growing anti-AI and anti data center sentiment at home, plus Larry Fink (ceo of Blackrock) in a recent interview being terrified of dissident groups using consumer drones to attack data centers.

3. Anthropic, Grok, and other AI vendors becoming more and more integrated into defense and military, plus increasingly reliance on AI for other national surveillance systems

Data centers are and will be targets, both for national military attacks as well as home grown dissident attacks, so they are proposing to move some of the critical workloads to somewhere that the only group that can attack the data center hosting the workload is a nation state with space launch capabilities. That significantly reduces the number of actors that can attack the data center. And if the US wants to they can probably bomb all the other space rocket launch facilities worldwide in less than 24 hours, leaving extremely limited capability to attack a space hosted DC.

Is it insane? Probably, but the US has done insane things with military budget before, and will continue to do so for a long time. If you are Elon, its a great time to milk that US defense budget for some more R&D, and even if the main project doesn't work out, he's still going to be able to keep some innovations within the company and apply them to Starlink and other more realistic endeavors.

Post reply on HN