Live data from Hacker News

Morningstar values SpaceX at $780B, half its IPO target

reuters.com

191–200 of 208 posts

Re: Morningstar values SpaceX at $780B, half its IPO target

#191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>I don't think so at all. In this context, it feels like even 150 Billions would be a big stretch considering revenue and forecasts. How are you valuating SpaceX?

Their launch business has a dominant market position but is not run for profit and xAI is loosing money. Starlink is the only segment earning real money: $7.2 billion in adjusted EBITDA. So 150 Billions seems "realistic" when taking Musk out of the equation. Maybe 150 to 250 billions would be better as a range if you want to be really optimistic.

> and xAI is loosing money.

xAI is burning through a tremendous amount of money.

it is getting propped up right now through leasing compute to Anthropic, which isn't really AI sector profitability. even if the AI bubble doesn't collapse, Anthropic is unlikely to want to keep shovelling money at its competitor.

and right now the xAI+x business segment is getting propped up by a couple billion a year in sustainable revenue from social media, making it look better than it should.

the core SpaceX/Starlink business itself looks pretty amazing and could probably justify $600B-$1T valuations, having roughly comparable financials to something like Visa, particularly if you removed the Starship development costs. but to say xAI is a boat anchor is probably being overly charitable... like if your boat anchor was a supertanker that was sinking into the abyss.

Re: Morningstar values SpaceX at $780B, half its IPO target

#194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There’s simply no version of financial reality that values this company at over 1T. Aswath Damodaran recently (pre S-1) valued SpaceX at $1.2T [1] - yeah I was shocked as well. Unfortunately, I haven't had time to dig into his numbers. But yeah, there's your _financial reality_. [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WhY5EF1_LjQ

Who is this guy and why should I listen to him?

If you're into finance or you're entering into it you should definitely know him. Google him. Watch his lectures. You can learn a lot from him even if you disagree.

Re: Morningstar values SpaceX at $780B, half its IPO target

#195

I want to buy options against QQQ so badly -- but Tesla has traded at a crazy multiple of revenue/profits for a very long time, so I'm wondering if Elon/AI hype will keep these stocks high longer than I want to pay the risk premium for (options).

Why short QQQ when SpaceX will only be 2% (according to a poster above), when many of the other companies in the index are tech and chip companies, such as NVDA, which are going gang-busters? Even if SpaceX went bankrupt you'd only see a 2% drop, which is easily covered by all the AI chip companies going up. If you think SpaceX is overvalued, buy options against it directly.

Missing context from my comment: I think the triple IPOs of SpaceX, OpenAI, and Anthropic, are going to be the thing that pops the AI bubble. They IPO for X, the stocks fall by some large double-digit percentage on future news (some model training didnt go well, or maybe China releases another DeepSeek model that tanks Nvidia stock like prior, etc), and the whole tech industry public market goes south. And since, from what I understand, most of the gains in the last few years on the stock market have been driven by AI-inflated valuations on a few large players, that crashes the whole market, and then we're _really_ in pain.

I don't know if this is realistic. But I look at these numbers and its like something does not add up here. The numbers are _way_ too high. As Altman said, "someone is going to lose a phenomenal amount of money". I don't want to bet on a specific player, because I don't know who, but I want to bet in general that someone is going to lose their shirt.

Re: Morningstar values SpaceX at $780B, half its IPO target

#196

Earlier quoted context omitted.

$PTL "screens" for: * air quality * environmental risk * GHG emissions * ecological impact * product sustainability https://www.inspireetf.com/screening yet weights ExxonMobil, the 21st largest company: https://companiesmarketcap.com/ as by far their 2nd largest holding: https://www.inspireetf.com/etf/ptl

Oil/Gas/Petroleum is essential for our economy to function, and the line between "ethical" and "not ethical" is a dial (one among many that all need to be tuned together), not a switch. $PTL/Inspire does not adjudicate "dial" ethical issues, just switches -- company practices/policies that it views as black-and-white good/bad. "It would be ethical if you produced N% less" doesn't fit that category.

Guess who organized decades-long misinformation campaigns to make them as essential as they currently are: https://wikipedia.org/wiki/ExxonMobil_climate_change_denial

Regardless, most companies I checked have multiple different ratings because that site can't even do basic data cleaning:

https://inspireinsight.com/AAPL/US https://inspireinsight.com/AAPL/PT

https://inspireinsight.com/GOOGL/GT https://inspireinsight.com/GOOGL/MX

https://inspireinsight.com/MSFT/AU https://inspireinsight.com/MSFT/US

https://inspireinsight.com/AVGO/US https://inspireinsight.com/0YXG/GB

https://inspireinsight.com/TSM/US https://inspireinsight.com/5425/TW

https://inspireinsight.com/LUBEREF/SA https://inspireinsight.com/2223/SA

so even they disagree with their own ratings ;)

Re: Morningstar values SpaceX at $780B, half its IPO target

#197
post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And LEO is using SpaceX to launch. SpaceX was launching a modest % of the LEO constellation but after the Blue Origin failure, SpaceX is the only launch provider who can fill that gap and actually let LEO deliver on contracted time. Please don't misunderstand me, I'm no Musk sycophant though I do love SpaceX and Starlink. I want us to have multiple providers of super cheap space launch capabilities and multiple diver…

I for one am sure that BlueOrigin will never get there.

I hope you are wrong, or at least that someone else does it.

I'm very happy for SpaceX's success but a monopoly on space launch capacity benefits nobody, SpaceX included.

Re: Morningstar values SpaceX at $780B, half its IPO target

#198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oil/Gas/Petroleum is essential for our economy to function, and the line between "ethical" and "not ethical" is a dial (one among many that all need to be tuned together), not a switch. $PTL/Inspire does not adjudicate "dial" ethical issues, just switches -- company practices/policies that it views as black-and-white good/bad. "It would be ethical if you produced N% less" doesn't fit that category.

Guess who organized decades-long misinformation campaigns to make them as essential as they currently are: https://wikipedia.org/wiki/ExxonMobil_climate_change_denial Regardless, most companies I checked have multiple different ratings because that site can't even do basic data cleaning: https://inspireinsight.com/AAPL/US https://inspireinsight.com/AAPL/PT https://inspireinsight.com/GOOGL/GT https://inspireinsight.co…

They update ratings every year I think... there's a spreadsheet with before/after values for each company that you can download.

Re: Morningstar values SpaceX at $780B, half its IPO target

#199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Guess who organized decades-long misinformation campaigns to make them as essential as they currently are: https://wikipedia.org/wiki/ExxonMobil_climate_change_denial Regardless, most companies I checked have multiple different ratings because that site can't even do basic data cleaning: https://inspireinsight.com/AAPL/US https://inspireinsight.com/AAPL/PT https://inspireinsight.com/GOOGL/GT https://inspireinsight.co…

They update ratings every year I think... there's a spreadsheet with before/after values for each company that you can download.

Most of the examples I provided are due to differing country codes; their site fails to recognize things like Alphabet trading on a Mexican stock exchange is still the same company: https://finance.yahoo.com/quote/GOOGL.MX/

$GOOGL.MX scoring differently than other $GOOGL listings makes me extremely skeptical that humans are diligently creating these scores (finance professionals should've recognized that secondary listings like $GOOGL.MX don't need their own scoring)

Re: Morningstar values SpaceX at $780B, half its IPO target

#200

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They update ratings every year I think... there's a spreadsheet with before/after values for each company that you can download.

Most of the examples I provided are due to differing country codes; their site fails to recognize things like Alphabet trading on a Mexican stock exchange is still the same company: https://finance.yahoo.com/quote/GOOGL.MX/ $GOOGL.MX scoring differently than other $GOOGL listings makes me extremely skeptical that humans are diligently creating these scores (finance professionals should've recognized that secondary li…

Scores on different exchanges may be due to varying behavior by international subsidiaries -- MSFT in Australia may be doing something objectionable that MSFT US does not do, for example. I'm not sure though.

What I think is more likely is that it's a dumb oversight in the web app and/or data - maybe an intern stubbed out international stocks and it got pushed to production

Post reply on HN