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

The space bit of SpaceX is worth $8 a share, says Morgan Stanley

ft.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 121 posts

Re: The space bit of SpaceX is worth $8 a share, says Morgan Stanley

#71

Post by JKCalhoun »

antonvs wrote: post #37
discreteevent wrote: post #28

Panhandler > I sat out the TMT bubble until they quit using the term "information superhighway," and it saved me an 80% drawdown. > I'm sitting out the AI / chip / SpaceX [AICSX, pronounced like the wrestling shoes?] bubble until they stop using the word "compute" as if it were a noun. > I'm guessing I'll save myself a drawdown on a similar scale. A comment under the original article.

> until they stop using the word "compute" as if it were a noun. That’s a bit silly, since it is a noun at this point, meaning computing resources or computing capacity. It’s nowhere near being a term similar to “information superhighway”, which was never a technical term used within the industry, it was purely used in communication mostly to the public or in government agency and contractor slide decks.

“Information Superhighway”, ha ha (and replete with billboards as we have come to find out).

As opposed, I suppose, to the library. Which is perhaps more like an information bike lane. (Or a pedestrian walkway?)

Re: The space bit of SpaceX is worth $8 a share, says Morgan Stanley

#72

Post by JKCalhoun »

ghtbircshotbe wrote: post #54

I have a hard time imagining how spx stock will drop to a reasonable price. You have to be a true believer at its current valuation, so who is going to sell? Maybe if enough insiders or stock options start selling it will drop.

The market overall drops and large investors start shedding their pricier/riskier stocks to offset losses.

Re: The space bit of SpaceX is worth $8 a share, says Morgan Stanley

#74

Post by JKCalhoun »

adastra22 wrote: post #53
close04 wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This is my industry I know it well How far ahead is SpaceX compared to the competition, a decade? More? Less? Is the gap closing or growing? > Their actual profit margin for launch of F9 is 62% - 80% depending on configuration. That is a margin unheard of in aerospace. Do you expect they maintain these margins on launch and whatever services they deliver from space as that gap is closing? Is their first mover advan…

The rest of the industry is about 10 years beyond SpaceX. But note that they are where SpaceX was a decade ago, which is not the same thing as “in 10 years they will catch up.” The gap is getting larger year by year, not smaller.

"The gap is getting larger year by year, not smaller."

You keep saying this—you'll have to explain. Very little in the world has ever worked like this—the opposite has generally been the case.

Re: The space bit of SpaceX is worth $8 a share, says Morgan Stanley

#75

Post by oskarkk »

HeavyStorm wrote: post #55
ben_w wrote: post #7

My draft blog post about all the things that are up with space data centres keeps getting bigger and bigger. "The other half of the MS model is data centres. “Orbital compute deployments” start in 2028, reach cost parity with their earthbound equivalents by 2031, and put 364GW of rigs in space by 2040." With 25% efficient cells, at 500 km altitude, in a terminator-tracing SSO, this is enough to occupy a *contiguous*…

I'm not very informed on SpaceX plans, but one thing I think people gloss over is how much maintenance a data center requires. Parts fail, computers get stuck on crash loops, etc. A space data center would need workers - computer people, not astronauts - and a constant supply of parts tob replace hardware. Whoever wrote this proposal doesn't understand neither space nor data centers.

Is a data center satellite really that different from a communications satellite? Starlink sats must have some significant processing power and nontrivial control system, and they work without physical maintenance. One data center sat is like one server rack, if it fails, it's fully lost and you just deorbit it, as it's done with Starlink sats. They sent 12443 Starlink sats to space, deorbited 1684. The thing that matters is failure rate, and the economics resulting from that. And also the cost of specialized resilient hardware.

Re: The space bit of SpaceX is worth $8 a share, says Morgan Stanley

#76

Post by tavavex »

adastra22 wrote: post #53
close04 wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This is my industry I know it well How far ahead is SpaceX compared to the competition, a decade? More? Less? Is the gap closing or growing? > Their actual profit margin for launch of F9 is 62% - 80% depending on configuration. That is a margin unheard of in aerospace. Do you expect they maintain these margins on launch and whatever services they deliver from space as that gap is closing? Is their first mover advan…

The rest of the industry is about 10 years beyond SpaceX. But note that they are where SpaceX was a decade ago, which is not the same thing as “in 10 years they will catch up.” The gap is getting larger year by year, not smaller.

> The gap is getting larger year by year, not smaller.

Why? Logically it would seem that learning how to do something that's already been done would be easier than discovering it. SpaceX has already done a lot of the work and has shown the others that it's possible and how they do it. Why won't the others catch up? I can't think of any industry that has a market leader that only gets further away from their competition forever.

Re: The space bit of SpaceX is worth $8 a share, says Morgan Stanley

#77

Post by Ekaros »

ben_w wrote: post #70
piva00 wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

300GW / 120kW = 2.5 million satellites, I don't think SpaceX can launch 2.5 million satellites. Even less keep replenishing all the ones needing decommissioning after 3-5 years, no maintenance can be made, so on and so forth. It's ridiculous anyway you cut it, it's a pipe dream.

Indeed; though one thing I've found researching this is that the exact numbers are all over the place, so for some it's "let's make a single giant DC" and others are "let's make one million small ones", with mass estimates for each bird in the bigger constellations varying from 1200 kg (at 120 kW, which is an absurd ratio) to about 8000 kg. Like I said higher up, at this scale, if you want to make your own fantasy pl…

Pretty much. There isn't really question could you build satellite with GPUs at certain scale and launch it to space. It is certainly already doable. No special unsolved engineering challenges when you have say dozen or hundred...

Now if we are talking about thousands or millions you have some real questions. Well cost was question to start with. But at millions satellites yeah there is clear issues.

Simple rule for numbers 1 gigawatt is 1 000 megawatts or 1 000 000 kilowatts... So math is pretty simple there in estimations.

Re: The space bit of SpaceX is worth $8 a share, says Morgan Stanley

#78

Post by Alpha3031 »

ghtbircshotbe wrote: post #54

I have a hard time imagining how spx stock will drop to a reasonable price. You have to be a true believer at its current valuation, so who is going to sell? Maybe if enough insiders or stock options start selling it will drop.

Well, as I understand it, SpaceX intends to continue to raise money from the market. Eventually the true believers will stop having money to give them.

Re: The space bit of SpaceX is worth $8 a share, says Morgan Stanley

#79

Post by xoa »

tavavex wrote: post #76
adastra22 wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The rest of the industry is about 10 years beyond SpaceX. But note that they are where SpaceX was a decade ago, which is not the same thing as “in 10 years they will catch up.” The gap is getting larger year by year, not smaller.

> The gap is getting larger year by year, not smaller. Why? Logically it would seem that learning how to do something that's already been done would be easier than discovering it. SpaceX has already done a lot of the work and has shown the others that it's possible and how they do it. Why won't the others catch up? I can't think of any industry that has a market leader that only gets further away from their competiti…

>I can't think of any industry that has a market leader that only gets further away from their competition forever.

You're on Hacker News and you can't think of silicon fabrication? What brand new players do you think are about to catch up to TSMC or Samsung? Or what about advanced jet turbine engines, why is China still having such trouble matching the performance of existing leaders after decades of work? Or operating systems, it's been Apple, BSD, Google, Linux, and Microsoft (or derivatives of these) for a long time. Or web browser engined. Or...

Some things are just really hard and involve enormous amounts of specifics, sunk costs and so on. Even if you know it's possible the implementation is everything, the idea that everything is trivially RE'd/cloned seems to have its limits in the real world.

Re: The space bit of SpaceX is worth $8 a share, says Morgan Stanley

#80

Post by ben_w »

ghtbircshotbe wrote: post #54

I have a hard time imagining how spx stock will drop to a reasonable price. You have to be a true believer at its current valuation, so who is going to sell? Maybe if enough insiders or stock options start selling it will drop.

I expect via court order or government intervention.

How many of the HODLers will be SpaceX believers, vs. Musk believers? Musk's already only narrowly avoided being banned from running publicly traded companies from the $420 tweet years back.

Post reply on HN