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

151–160 of 301 posts

Re: We Think the SpaceX IPO Is Overvalued

#151

Post by tyre »

mayama wrote: post #97
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.

After articles on how starship is never getting off launchpad, I'm sceptical of news regarding elon, pro and anti. Sure, things like FSD are hopium or scam, but not everything could be. Haven't seen hard science estimates on their new ai satellites.

With the rockets, it was more, “wow that seems impossible, but incredible if you can pull it off versus existing options.”

With the space data centers, it’s more, “Okay yeah so let’s say you do…why?”

It just seems like a really hard thing to do when the available options are, like, the Chinese building data centers on the Tibetan plateau where it is cold, ample renewable energy, tons of land, and, like, oxygen.

Re: We Think the SpaceX IPO Is Overvalued

#152

Post by skybrian »

ianburrell wrote: post #69
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

150 kW is tiny, that is a single rack. Would have to launch a huge number of them to match the GW data centers being built. There is also a lot of overhead for each one. If Starlink didn't exist, then it could make sense to put edge data centers in orbit. But Starlink means can put edge computing everywhere on the ground.

Would it make any sense for it to orbit next to a Starlink satellite?

Re: We Think the SpaceX IPO Is Overvalued

#153

Post by bulbar »

NordStreamYacht wrote: post #101
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.

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.

I'm not convinced that's the case. I tend to think he just saw something he found cool and triggered his narcissism so he had to come up with something he thought was cooler. That something turned out to be BS and he just dropped the idea and moved on.

Re: We Think the SpaceX IPO Is Overvalued

#154

Post by ericd »

tyre wrote: post #145
arjie wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If SpaceX is very successful he will spend everything on a mission to mars. He's pretty up front about this. If it costs a lot and the company runs at a loss then it costs a lot and the company runs at a loss. Read the S-1 > We believe that our current space efforts will catalyze transformative breakthroughs that could reshape terrestrial industries and lead to the emergence of new trillion-dollar markets on the Moon…

> Mars is mentioned 60 times in there. That's what he's going to spend the money on if it comes to it. And yet the vast majority of addressable market they list is enterprise AI apps lol

Market to address, to pay for going to Mars.

Re: We Think the SpaceX IPO Is Overvalued

#155

Post by ericd »

overgard wrote: post #46
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'm pretty sure he's full of shit and has zero real intention of building orbital data centers. It makes for a good headline, which is what these AI companies are in the business of. The math doesn't math and the logistics of maintaining and building the datacenter seem insane.

They claim they want to get to a gigawatt per year by the end of next year, so we won't have to wait long to see.

Re: We Think the SpaceX IPO Is Overvalued

#156

Post by hparadiz »

SwellJoe wrote: post #136
hparadiz wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Relax man. He's a bipolar weirdo who isn't always likable but progress doesn't always come from likeable people. And the fact of the matter is he has actually delivered on a bunch of stuff I thought I'd never see in my lifetime.

What kinds of things he's delivered do you have in mind?

Let's see. If Paypal was his only legacy he would have already done 99% more than most people but then he went on to build a car company that was the best selling electric car brand in the world for a decade and in the process standardized not just electric charging but the plug we're all using today. Then they released a home battery with a sub 10 ms ATS which is necessary for seamless in-house grid/off grid transition. Finally the push for a reusable rocket booster was entirely a management decision on his part. If the next words out of your mouth are "he didn't do that, his engineers did" please come up with something more original. This isn't reddit.

Re: We Think the SpaceX IPO Is Overvalued

#157

Post by SwellJoe »

dilyevsky wrote: post #147
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.

Pinning CAHSR jobs program as hyperloop's fault is pretty funny. Maybe he did intend to upset it but since both turned out to be massive boondoggles doesn't seem like it worked - they managed to delay it themselves just fine.

Sure, California is a failed state on a lot of fronts, but Musk literally said he was pushing hyperloop for that reason. https://www.fresnobee.com/opinion/editorials/article26445107...

Whether he was the only reason for high speed rail being derailed and delayed isn't really the point. He intentionally worked against mass transit, and lied repeatedly about hyperloop as part of that.

Re: We Think the SpaceX IPO Is Overvalued

#158

Post by wmf »

kldavis4 wrote: post #10
m-hodges wrote: post #2

> Even at $63 per share, we give SpaceX a lot of benefit of the doubt in two of the three scenarios, in which we assume the company can achieve a rapidly reusable Starship rocket enabling multiple launches per week and successfully commercialize data centers in space. > In our downside scenario, orbital data centers won’t work or offer any advantage over terrestrial ones. We surmise that the company, having invested…

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 see it as a hedge against NIMBYs. If terrestrial data centers literally can't be built then orbital is cheaper by definition. If not, just don't build them.
Post reply on HN