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

101–110 of 301 posts

Re: We Think the SpaceX IPO Is Overvalued

#101

Post by NordStreamYacht »

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.

I don't think he's dumb at all, if what you say is correct. He wanted to block something for his own benefit and he achieved it.

Re: We Think the SpaceX IPO Is Overvalued

#102

Post by sumeno »

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…

There is no benefit, and they aren't going to actually do it in any meaningful way. When was the last time Elon Musk made a factual forward looking statement about one of his companies or products? It's all just bullshit, no need to dig deeper than that.

Re: We Think the SpaceX IPO Is Overvalued

#103

Post by lelandfe »

pryce wrote: post #35
hparadiz wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The video they posted today outlines their specs. They are gonna be smaller. About 100T. Based on Starlink architecture but with way larger radiators and solar panels. Apparently the design is simpler than existing Starlinks because it has fewer different parts. Specs: https://x.com/SawyerMerritt/status/2064108916611420273?s=20

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.

What, you don't have a Tesla elevator on your street yet? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j70GvgXt-lE

Re: We Think the SpaceX IPO Is Overvalued

#104

Post by SwellJoe »

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…

He doesn't actually want progress. He wants power and wealth for himself. Public transit is an equalizer, it serves normal people.

Re: We Think the SpaceX IPO Is Overvalued

#105

Post by ralph84 »

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…

Voting control doesn't change management's fiduciary duty to all shareholders. The founders retaining voting control has worked out fine for Alphabet shareholders.

Re: We Think the SpaceX IPO Is Overvalued

#106

Post by sumeno »

SeanAnderson wrote: post #4

Everyone says SpaceX IPO price is too high, but it's the most interesting IPO in a long time, it's critical to the US government, and America is, frankly, addicted to gambling. I'm not convinced it's going anywhere but up for a long while.

Even SpaceX's own documents estimate the space stuff to only have an addressable market of $370B, and it's not like it's a document full of conservative estimates considering they estimate their AI at approximately the entire GDP of the United States.

Re: We Think the SpaceX IPO Is Overvalued

#107

Post by [deleted] »

GMoromisato wrote: post #92

A lot (everything?) hinges on orbital data centers. If they don't work, SpaceX is overvalued. SpaceX plans to launch 120 kW satellites, each weighing 1.7 tons. Let's be conservative and say it ends up being a 100 kW satellite massing 2 tons. Let's be conservative and say Starship can launch 50 tons to orbit for $20 million ($5 million more than a Falcon 9 launch). 50 kW per ton x $400K per ton = $8,000 per kW = $8 mi…

[deleted]

Re: We Think the SpaceX IPO Is Overvalued

#109

Post by NortySpock »

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…

Orbital ring would kickstart the space economy like nothing else, and is technically achievable with existing materials.

Re: We Think the SpaceX IPO Is Overvalued

#110

Post by lenerdenator »

vagab0nd wrote: post #91
kldavis4 wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The orbital data center thing is really strange. Without some kind of massive technological breakthrough the physics of an orbital data center make no sense. Napkin math for a single data center including solar panels, radiators, compute and structure is somewhere on the order of ~6500 tonnes. Let's say Starship can put 100-150 tonnes into orbit per launch, that is somewhere between 40-65 launches for just one single…

I think it comes down to scaling and removing the bottlenecks. If you build one data center on earth, you did just that. If you build one in space and make it work and cost effective, you can scale infinitely (which is why SpaceX is uniquely positioned), until you hit the next bottleneck (which is why Tesla is building a fab). Tangential: If you play Factorio or Satisfactory, this is _all_ you do. Removing bottleneck…

> If you build one in space and make it work and cost effective, you can scale infinitely

"If we can just keep consuming massive amounts of capital, at some point, we'll turn a profit. Maybe even a big one."

It's not 2019 anymore, but this mindset acts like it still is.

SpaceX, along with its wanna-IPO classmates OpenAI and Anthropic, are going public because there's basically no more private investor money left and there's no political will (outside of whatever the hell is going on in Donald Trump's head) to lower interest rates to what they were in the golden age of blitzscaling.

They have to ask the public for more money. They just don't have enough humility to do it on decent terms, as evidenced by the IPO deals they're floating.

If this fails to produce what you're talking about - which is likely given things like "speed of radio transmissions", "thermal conductivity in a vacuum" and other things governed by those pesky laws of physics - the game's over.

Post reply on HN