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

SpaceX stock drops to a new low and loses $1T in value in a month

businessinsider.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 73 posts

Re: SpaceX stock drops to a new low and loses $1T in value in a month

#51

Post by cyanydeez »

throwaway13337 wrote: post #37

Are there any reasonable analyses of the practicality of data centers in space? I know Dwarkesh Patel was interviewing Elon and brought up the fact that power cost for data centers is only 20%. The number I could find is 7-18%? GPUs are the majority of the cost. I don't think Elon responded directly to that. There's the argument that licensing to build these things is cheaper in space. But earth has a lot of space in…

when the billionaires trigger a nuke fest, I assume they want their AI overload safe.

Re: SpaceX stock drops to a new low and loses $1T in value in a month

#52

Post by manquer »

LorenDB wrote: post #29

Investors clearly aren't familiar with rocket launches. SpaceX scrubbed their Starship launch last evening so they could fix an engine issue. SpaceX stock immediately crashed. Even worse, Rocket Lab, an entirely unaffiliated company, had its stock plummet after the SpaceX scrub.

RKLB has jumped 10x in last 18 months largely because of SpaceX hype , their business outlook hasn’t changed that much , so it is natural drops also come with SpaceX.

There is an enormous open short position in SpaceX now https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2026-07-15/short-sel...

The float is going to triple in several steps with 900M employee stocks getting added to 550M issued in the IPO.

The thesis that larger pool will depress prices even if all other things remain same is quite sound, just like a small float inflates the price .

These events are merely triggers / focal points as would the quarterly results next month and various unlocking dates .

the traders are savvy they are just looking at different things and using company news to focus the price actions on .

Valuations are not based on business models or financial performance for the highly visible public companies, that has always been the case since earliest days of the modern market .

it is just vibes or to put it differently a strong belief/faith discounting every risk . Without that faith TSLA won’t trade at 350 PE with middling growth no new products currently scheduled . SPCX at $2T+, even for an AI company a lot - it is larger than valuations of both market leaders combined while having Maybe the faith will prove justified or maybe not, either way the price moves by sentiment alone not any actual business logic

Re: SpaceX stock drops to a new low and loses $1T in value in a month

#53

Post by Animats »

B-Con wrote: post #19
verzali wrote: post #9

Curious that Tesla stock fell in price at the moment of the Starship abort. For what possible reason would a failed rocket launch affect the fortunes of an electric car company?

I can see them as a shared fate for a couple reasons: * the obvious one is Elon - both valuations are largely propped up on belief in Elon. Whenever he falters, his companies that are speculation-based (all of them) will take a hit * Elon pitched SpaceX as an AI company. Tesla needs better AI because they keep sending signals that they won't be at L5 anytime soon, and Tesla's valuation is still very speculative[0]at…

> Tesla needs better AI because they keep sending signals that they won't be at L5 anytime soon.

China now insists that self-driving cars be "SAE level 3.5" if they let the driver take their hands off the wheel. "If the driver fails to respond within the specified timeframe or is physically unable to take control (e.g., due to unconsciousness), the system must automatically initiate a Minimal Risk Manoeuvre (MRM). This includes the ability to change lanes and park the vehicle safely in a location that does not obstruct traffic, while minimising risks to passengers and other road users."[1] That takes effect in China July 1, 2027. Mercedes Drive Pilot is close to this level. Tesla, not even close.

That's probably the right answer in the assisted self driving space.

[1] https://www.electrive.com/2026/02/26/china-introduces-new-re...

Re: SpaceX stock drops to a new low and loses $1T in value in a month

#54

Post by [deleted] »

throwaway13337 wrote: post #37

Are there any reasonable analyses of the practicality of data centers in space? I know Dwarkesh Patel was interviewing Elon and brought up the fact that power cost for data centers is only 20%. The number I could find is 7-18%? GPUs are the majority of the cost. I don't think Elon responded directly to that. There's the argument that licensing to build these things is cheaper in space. But earth has a lot of space in…

[deleted]

Re: SpaceX stock drops to a new low and loses $1T in value in a month

#55

Post by notahacker »

throwaway13337 wrote: post #37

Are there any reasonable analyses of the practicality of data centers in space? I know Dwarkesh Patel was interviewing Elon and brought up the fact that power cost for data centers is only 20%. The number I could find is 7-18%? GPUs are the majority of the cost. I don't think Elon responded directly to that. There's the argument that licensing to build these things is cheaper in space. But earth has a lot of space in…

This has been done on HN a few times. The heat dissipation argument is a solved problem with known physics, it's just that pointing out the inefficiency of radiative cooling is the correct response to the daft claim that "space is cold" (the solution is "launch lots of additional mass into space every 5 years" which isn't exactly cheap). Though that claim is still better than Elon trying to tell idiots that SpaceX's ODCs are "much simpler than a Starlink satellite"...

Good coverage of the relevant problems are here https://peraspera.us/realities-of-space-based-compute/

Perhaps an understated one is chip obsolence. With a terrestrial datacentre you replace chips when they're uneconomical due to how much faster alternatives are or when they reach end of life; with an orbital datacentre you replace them on fixed cycles depending on how much propellant you launched with.

But nobody doubts you can build them, it's just hard to imagine a scenario in which a terrestrial equivalent isn't cheaper, more flexible and more reliable. Actual good reasons for adding compute capacity in space are, ironically, the latency: for some edge cases like autonomous control systems that matters more than the attractive unit economics of sticking computers in a building.

Still, the economic case for ODCs [eventually] is more compelling than the case for the value of that revenue stream to SpaceX exceeding current US GDP in the not too distant future...

Re: SpaceX stock drops to a new low and loses $1T in value in a month

#56

Post by FloorEgg »

throwaway13337 wrote: post #37

Are there any reasonable analyses of the practicality of data centers in space? I know Dwarkesh Patel was interviewing Elon and brought up the fact that power cost for data centers is only 20%. The number I could find is 7-18%? GPUs are the majority of the cost. I don't think Elon responded directly to that. There's the argument that licensing to build these things is cheaper in space. But earth has a lot of space in…

Two things about your line of thinking stand out to me:

The first is a subtle implication that the share price of SpaceX is dependent on the short term feasibility of data centers in space. I don't think it is. Its more dependent on public sentiment and hype, which is detached from the truth and can have its focus directed elsewhere as the company engaged in many activities. I would also argue that the company's culture matters more than any engineering specifics, especially with how diverse their assets, competencies and offerings are. Maybe you didn't mean to infer this though.

Second, if intelligence is something like electricity, in that it's fungible and translates fairly universally into value, then it's safe to assume civilization will pursue expanding it endlessly (and will never have that demand satiated) like a force of nature. If this is true, would we rather have 1000x or 1,000,000x the data centers we have today within earths atmosphere or out in space somewhere? Personally, at that scale I would prefer them far away. (Not even in LEO)

There is no core physics reason why AI data centers in space can't work. It's just really hard engineering. Kind of like what reusable rockets looked like 10 years ago... All the experts were nay-sayers.

Short term, who knows, SpaceX could struggle financially and be a terrible investment today. I have no idea. It seems overpriced to me now and it did at IPO. But on a 10 or 20 year investment horizon, it looks a lot more interesting. I don't own shares but maybe dollar cost averaging in at some point isn't a bad idea especially if the price comes down further and as part of a diversified portfolio.

Re: SpaceX stock drops to a new low and loses $1T in value in a month

#57

Post by pandaman »

abeppu wrote: post #45

Before the IPO there was much concern that the changes in rules to allow fast inclusion in indices like Nasdaq-100 and Russell 1000 would mean that there would be an artificially elevated price. Was that effect just over-estimated? Or should SPCX have dropped even further without that support?

It's not an estimated effect - it's pretty evident as any long index position is automatically long $SPCX and yes, it would have been even lower without these forced buys.

Re: SpaceX stock drops to a new low and loses $1T in value in a month

#58

Post by xnx »

throwaway13337 wrote: post #37

Are there any reasonable analyses of the practicality of data centers in space? I know Dwarkesh Patel was interviewing Elon and brought up the fact that power cost for data centers is only 20%. The number I could find is 7-18%? GPUs are the majority of the cost. I don't think Elon responded directly to that. There's the argument that licensing to build these things is cheaper in space. But earth has a lot of space in…

> Are there any reasonable analyses of the practicality of data centers in space?

This video points out that even if you take the most unrealistically optimistic value of every variable, it still doesn't make sense:

"The Space Data Centers Situation is Insane" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_qpdUNMt2yg

Re: SpaceX stock drops to a new low and loses $1T in value in a month

#59

Post by FloorEgg »

lukeschlather wrote: post #22
hx8 wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

$200b seems very low for a company with this level of capital investment. They did 167 launches last year. It's one of the few industries where US is outproducing China. We have both more launches and heavier launches. Put another way, the US spent $250b~ (inflation adjusted) dollars on the shuttle program, and we get much more output from SpaceX than we did for Shuttle.

SpaceX's annual revenue is estimated at $40B for 2026. A comparison might be Lockheed Martin, with annual revenue of $75B in 2025, and a market cap of $120B. So I wouldn't say $200B sounds low at all, even if their revenue doubles (twice, since $40B is actually a projection where they were doing $20B last year, though it's apples and oranges with the acquisition of Musk's failing companies.)

Comparing revenue, without at least also comparing revenue growth rates and leverage ratios is really nonsense financial analysis.

It was the same thing with Tesla. Everyone screaming when Tesla had. $20bn market cap how they were extremely over valued because their car sales revenue paled in comparison to the other car manufacturers and yet their market cap was in the same ballpark. It was such a joke and so obviously unprofessional / dishonest. The traditional automakers were all nearly insolvent (tens to hundreds of billions of debt) and had stagnant growth. At the time Tesla had no debt and was growing consistently ~70% a year. Anyone willing to actually analyze and see the truth and not just read headlines and repeat them could have seen it.

Post reply on HN