The SpaceX Sham
dissentmagazine.org
The SpaceX Sham
1–10 of 51 posts
Re: The SpaceX Sham
#2> Although SpaceX stock has since fallen far below its IPO price
I'm a skeptic on SpaceX but the IPO price was $135, low was $108 and current price is $130. I wouldn't say that's far below.
Re: The SpaceX Sham
#3it's worse than a scam, he's doing real, permanent damage to the environment
* https://techcrunch.com/2026/07/31/spacex-wont-remove-all-of-...
and illegally, not sure how he's allowed to get away with it
and each starlink deorbit is putting toxic pollution into the atmosphere without penalty (launches too)
* https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2025-space-orbit-satellit...
Re: The SpaceX Sham
#4> Although SpaceX stock has since fallen far below its IPO price I'm a skeptic on SpaceX but the IPO price was $135, low was $108 and current price is $130. I wouldn't say that's far below.
Worth noting that it actually opened at $150 on public markets. It's kind of funny how we call the $135 figure the "public offering" price when there is really nothing public about it. Maybe it made more sense in some past era when it was more difficult for third parties to make private pre-IPO investments.
Not that there's anything particularly unusual about this. High profile tech companies almost universally (actually I am not aware of any moderately recent exceptions at all) fall below the actual public opening price in the days or weeks following the IPO. I honestly don't know why anybody buys them.
Re: The SpaceX Sham
#5It's difficult to get past what comes across as an attempt to analytically substantiate moralistic reasoning. The contention that it's scandalous to raise capital to support an "automated future" then a dotted line to transhumanism and then the conclusion "it's a sham" feels shoddy.
Re: The SpaceX Sham
#6SpaceX and Elon are the litmus test for the future. You're either with him, or your opinions are ignorant and irrelevant.
Re: The SpaceX Sham
#7@cdrnsf is posting negative articles all you do? isn't it exhausting to bathe in negativity all day long?
Re: The SpaceX Sham
#8> punitive capital gains taxation
A strange turn of phrase. What is the crime in view that's supposed to be punished?
Re: The SpaceX Sham
#9> Negative coverage of the IPO was limited due to the participation of so many major banks in the IPO process; they don’t want to poison the cash cow they’re milking for underwriting fees.
WTF? Anyone willing to read this far knows that this is flat out false. The negative coverage was unrelenting, and largely driven by big players peeved by the unconventional process. Anyone who bothers to continue past that point is probably just looking for validation.
Re: The SpaceX Sham
#10The real sham has yet to materialize. You only get a single $1T IPO. For the AI labs, investors are tapped out, and the only thing left is a huge IPO. Google, Meta, Microsoft's cash reserves are drying up, they're squeezing operations for every cent, and sure they can issue some stocks to raise cash, but not $1T.
I think this bubble's failure mode matches that of a Ponzi scheme.