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

A forecast of the fair market value of SpaceX's businesses

futuresearch.ai

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 214 posts

Re: A forecast of the fair market value of SpaceX's businesses

#191

Post by 0xy »

cerved wrote: post #78
saadn92 wrote: post #22

The xAI piece is the one that stands out to me. $258B for a lab that's burning $1.46B/quarter against $430M revenue, valued almost entirely on a merger anchor from four months ago.

For $380B you can get both AT&T and Verizon and you pay ~1.55x the revenue. Why pay 38x for Starlink?

Starlink is less than 10 years away from providing full data services to cellphones globally, allowing them to offer a better service at a cheaper rate to AT&T and Verizon. Not to mention more coverage.

Also, AT&T and Verizon customers don't love their provider. They despise them. I walked into a Verizon store last year and was outright scammed by the staff member into their insurance plan after explicitly declining it (they just added it to the bill anyway).

These legacy companies will be irrelevant.

Re: A forecast of the fair market value of SpaceX's businesses

#192

Post by mbrubeck »

Noaidi wrote: post #154
darth_aardvark wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Of course they would! If the P/E of a company is 1.1 it is overvalued by definition so why would anyone buy an over valued company? This is obviously untrue. Would you sell a box that spits out $1 million dollars a year for 1 million dollars?

I do not know the P/E ratio for your magic box, sorry. A P/E ratio of 1 indicates that a company's share price is equal to its earnings per share, suggesting that investors are paying $1 for every $1 of earnings. A P/E ratio of 10 indicates that a company's share price is equal to its earnings per share, suggesting that investors are paying $10 for every $1 of earnings. Which is the better deal? Neither! The first co…

But why should the fairest price be equal to exactly 12 months of earnings? Why not 1 month, or 100 months?

Is there something special about the length of Earth's orbit that makes it the correct ratio for converting flows to values? If a business were incorporated on Mars, would the fair price be one Earth year of earnings, or one Mars year of earnings? (The latter price would be 88% higher.)

Re: A forecast of the fair market value of SpaceX's businesses

#193

Post by croes »

scottyah wrote: post #140
arein3 wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is musk derangement syndrome a thing?

Yes, and it makes much less sense to me. It boils down to he's rich on paper, and doesn't put on a fake PR mask.

Let’s ignore things like the pedoguy incident and his ridiculous defense it was South African slang.

Or how he helped dismantle USAID which leads to real death of people.

You’re being spoiled with not having a fake PR mask. He‘s just spared from real consequences because of his wealth. As soon as real consequences are at the horizon that changes pretty quickly. It just happens too rarely.

Re: A forecast of the fair market value of SpaceX's businesses

#194

Post by croes »

scottyah wrote: post #185
arein3 wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Once you see it, it's preety funny how these people pick weird little hills to die on.

Society seems a lot more full of people trying to broadcast who they are from their opinions on stuff instead of what they've done.

Society seems to favor sociopaths who destroy everything for their own benefit.

Do you think DOGE has done something good or did it just help authoritarians to dismantle opposition?

Since Musk, Trump, Thiel & Co. started to implement their vision of a society the world turned to the worse. And they won‘t be the one who habe to endure the harsh consequences

Re: A forecast of the fair market value of SpaceX's businesses

#195

Post by ben_w »

0xy wrote: post #191
cerved wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For $380B you can get both AT&T and Verizon and you pay ~1.55x the revenue. Why pay 38x for Starlink?

Starlink is less than 10 years away from providing full data services to cellphones globally, allowing them to offer a better service at a cheaper rate to AT&T and Verizon. Not to mention more coverage. Also, AT&T and Verizon customers don't love their provider. They despise them. I walked into a Verizon store last year and was outright scammed by the staff member into their insurance plan after explicitly declining…

> Starlink is less than 10 years away from providing full data services to cellphones globally

10 years is a long time, considering the global reactions to America under Trump, and also Musk's tight coupling to Trump, and even in the US given how many bridges Musk burned.

If Starlink was properly spun off and independent of Musk this would be much less of an issue, but now? Now the rest of the world is likely to treat it like the US treats Huawei.

Re: A forecast of the fair market value of SpaceX's businesses

#196

Post by ben_w »

fastball wrote: post #97
kibwen wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The question is whether those markets are not already adequately served by Falcon 9. Once again, just because you have a jumbo jet that can fly 500 people from New York to London does not mean that everyone flying out of New York wants to go to London, and it doesn't mean that it's worth flying that jumbo jet from New York to Pierre, South Dakota with only one passenger on board.

> The question is whether those markets are not already adequately served by Falcon 9 What does that even mean? Almost every single Falcon 9 customer will prefer launching on Starship if/when it is available, because the cost will be much lower. A very small segment who have payloads that are exactly Falcon 9 sized and want a very particular orbit might still be better served by F9, but maybe not. Beyond that , much…

It may not even be cheaper when it works; upper stage reuse still isn't there.

(I'd like it to be, but until it is, it isn't).

Re: A forecast of the fair market value of SpaceX's businesses

#197

Post by frm88 »

malfist wrote: post #3

An passive investors are going to get hosed by this thanks to NASDAQ cooking the rules to favor Elon and his band of misfits. No longer will there be a year of price discovery for index funds, 15 days. Meaning index funds have to buy it at the peak of the hype cycle. Will be a huge wealth transfer from mom and pop retirement accounts to the ultra wealthy.

The S&P500 will make an exception, too. Patrick Boyle made a video analysing this and pointing to consequences https://youtu.be/8rS3fTbC7TE?si=uYZU230dzqqwp1Np

Re: A forecast of the fair market value of SpaceX's businesses

#198

Post by Zigurd »

tliptay wrote: post #70
malfist wrote: post #3

An passive investors are going to get hosed by this thanks to NASDAQ cooking the rules to favor Elon and his band of misfits. No longer will there be a year of price discovery for index funds, 15 days. Meaning index funds have to buy it at the peak of the hype cycle. Will be a huge wealth transfer from mom and pop retirement accounts to the ultra wealthy.

Wow! This comment inspired me to dig deeper. After 20+ years in the market, today I learned: "The S&P 500 is a float-adjusted, market-capitalization-weighted index." So presumably an S&P 500 index fund is not disadvantaged, since it is tracking a float-adjusted index, i.e. the weight of SpaceX will be tiny if its float is tiny. Or, is there a nuance that I'm missing?

The SpaceX float is small in proportion to a ridonculous valuation.

Re: A forecast of the fair market value of SpaceX's businesses

#199

Post by Noaidi »

mbrubeck wrote: post #192
Noaidi wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I do not know the P/E ratio for your magic box, sorry. A P/E ratio of 1 indicates that a company's share price is equal to its earnings per share, suggesting that investors are paying $1 for every $1 of earnings. A P/E ratio of 10 indicates that a company's share price is equal to its earnings per share, suggesting that investors are paying $10 for every $1 of earnings. Which is the better deal? Neither! The first co…

But why should the fairest price be equal to exactly 12 months of earnings? Why not 1 month, or 100 months? Is there something special about the length of Earth's orbit that makes it the correct ratio for converting flows to values? If a business were incorporated on Mars, would the fair price be one Earth year of earnings, or one Mars year of earnings? (The latter price would be 88% higher.)

Now you’re beginning to understand. Listen I have a degree in economics. I never wanted to economics because it’s all bullshit. It’s arbitrary measurements and it’s not a science.

Re: A forecast of the fair market value of SpaceX's businesses

#200

Post by verzali »

saadn92 wrote: post #22

The xAI piece is the one that stands out to me. $258B for a lab that's burning $1.46B/quarter against $430M revenue, valued almost entirely on a merger anchor from four months ago.

Most of the numbers seen arbitrary to me. Why is Starship worth $170bn? Based on what analysis? Why 38x earnings for Starlink? Maybe the AI has some justification, but the way it is presented just looks flimsy.
Post reply on HN