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

We Think the SpaceX IPO Is Overvalued

morningstar.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 301 posts

Re: We Think the SpaceX IPO Is Overvalued

#291

Post by bandrami »

ericd wrote: post #289
bandrami wrote: post #285

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right but the word "capex" isn't a magical amulet that makes balance of payments and cash flow problems disappear. Plenty of companies have been wrecked by overextending on capital spending.

Yeah, for sure, but it's also usually something that's a bit easier to trim when needed, unless they got way ahead of themselves and went deep into debt to do it. Most public companies have much worse debt:equity ratios.

And if the IPO does a WeWork, SpaceX's debt:equity ratio gets really bad really fast

Re: We Think the SpaceX IPO Is Overvalued

#292

Post by shushpanchik »

jmyeet wrote: post #184
Hansenq wrote: post #112

You can absolutely level this claim against Tesla too. When deliveries dropped a year ago, the stock price didn't go down. Tesla's stock is disconnected from the fundamentals and every stock investor today knows this. Why would SpaceX be any different? If anything it would be even more disconnected from the fundamentals than Tesla is, given how much more control it gives Elon. SpaceX stock is a bet on Elon, full stop…

I 100% agree SpaceX (and Tesla) is a bet on Elon, completely divorced from the fundamentals. But I don't think people realize just how risky this is. Tesla is only one administration change away from going bankrupt. Ask yourself what would happen to Tesla if BYD could freely import cars. This might not even take an administration change. Elon very famously had a public falling out with Donald Trump, going so far as t…

> Tesla is only one administration change away from going bankrupt. Ask yourself what would happen to Tesla if BYD could freely import cars.

Well, here in Australia, BYD (and lots of other CN EV brands) can freeely import cars, and Model Y still outsells every other EV. [1]

[1]: https://thedriven.io/2026/06/03/australian-electric-vehicle-...

Re: We Think the SpaceX IPO Is Overvalued

#293

Post by queenkjuul »

fc417fc802 wrote: post #201
queenkjuul wrote: post #196

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The physical fundamentals don't work. Radiating exhaust heat is exponentially harder in space than in the atmosphere.

What is the equilibrium temperature of a panel of black sheet metal hanging out at an orbit of 1 AU? Because if the thing is solar powered then it cannot exceed that temperature on average (ie across the entire mass) due to energy being conserved. You can do goofy things like using solar power coupled with a heating element (such as a GPU) to shift more heat to one part of the panel or another (ie employ an insuffici…

Well the equilibrium temperature of outer space is roughly 0K.

So how do you remove megawatts of heat in 0K?

Re: We Think the SpaceX IPO Is Overvalued

#294

Post by queenkjuul »

hparadiz wrote: post #195
queenkjuul wrote: post #189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd like to point out something i learned the other day: Alphabet owns some SpaceX shares, which makes Google's sudden 90-day compute contract with xAI seem a little less than coincidental

It's quite simple. xAI bought a shit ton of GPUs for Grok thinking they would be competitive. When that didn't pan out they found themselves with either giving away Grok for mostly free or renting out the capacity to someone else for a shit ton of money. They chose a shit ton of money.

Right; and Google chose to sign that contract the week of the IPO to preserve their share values, the contract allows them to bail after 90 days

Re: We Think the SpaceX IPO Is Overvalued

#295

Post by queenkjuul »

Ancapistani wrote: post #259
queenkjuul wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Space GPUs are stupid, so is hyperloop, so is the Vegas Loop; robotaxis don't work, cybertruck sucks, the humanoid robots don't work, the new roadster is nowhere to be seen. SpaceX blew up an entire launchpad because Musk thought flame diverters are gay, or something. And, yes, Twitter is now a shithole.

Every single one of those examples is both valid and - I believe, at least - misunderstood. Musk has a singular goal as far as I can tell: to make humanity a multi-planetary species. All of those things are testing the boundaries of what's possible in areas that will or could be very important for building a permanent settlement on Mars. I posit that while there's much room for debate around whether or not those proj…

I'm sorry, you'll have to do an awful lot of explaining to do if you want me to believe Hyperloop, a 100+ year idea proven not to work, and the Vegas Loop, one of the most asinine infrastructure projects I've ever witnessed in my life, could possibly in any way whatsoever contribute to life on Mars

Re: We Think the SpaceX IPO Is Overvalued

#296

Post by ericd »

bandrami wrote: post #291
ericd wrote: post #289

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, for sure, but it's also usually something that's a bit easier to trim when needed, unless they got way ahead of themselves and went deep into debt to do it. Most public companies have much worse debt:equity ratios.

And if the IPO does a WeWork, SpaceX's debt:equity ratio gets really bad really fast

I guess we'll see soon :-)

Re: We Think the SpaceX IPO Is Overvalued

#297

Post by osigurdson »

oldfuture wrote: post #15

And the prospectus says it plainly: "Mr. Musk will be able to control the outcome of matters requiring shareholder approval." Musk holds over 85% voting power through Class B super-voting shares (10 votes/share). Public investors combined will have 15%. What Musk Controls: - CEO removal = his consent. You can't fire him even if he destroys the company - Take business for himself. SpaceX gets a rocket deal? Musk can s…

I don't think many who plan on buying the stock it to be controlled by anyone other than Musk.

Re: We Think the SpaceX IPO Is Overvalued

#298

Post by adgjlsfhk1 »

credit_guy wrote: post #281
ac29 wrote: post #246

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most of that cost was presumably the 100,000 GPUs it contains, they didn't even build the building

Maybe, but in the end if the cost of launches is less than 10% the cost of the GPUs, then why is the project non-sense?

"If you give me 5 years and everything goes perfect, I can give you a system that's 9% worse than what you already have", you don't have a great investor pitch.

Re: We Think the SpaceX IPO Is Overvalued

#299

Post by farfatched »

shushpanchik wrote: post #292
jmyeet wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I 100% agree SpaceX (and Tesla) is a bet on Elon, completely divorced from the fundamentals. But I don't think people realize just how risky this is. Tesla is only one administration change away from going bankrupt. Ask yourself what would happen to Tesla if BYD could freely import cars. This might not even take an administration change. Elon very famously had a public falling out with Donald Trump, going so far as t…

> Tesla is only one administration change away from going bankrupt. Ask yourself what would happen to Tesla if BYD could freely import cars. Well, here in Australia, BYD (and lots of other CN EV brands) can freeely import cars, and Model Y still outsells every other EV. [1] [1]: https://thedriven.io/2026/06/03/australian-electric-vehicle-...

Model Y is the most sold model, but BYD is the most sold brand. (Section 2 of your linked post.)

Re: We Think the SpaceX IPO Is Overvalued

#300

Post by Ancapistani »

queenkjuul wrote: post #295
Ancapistani wrote: post #259

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Every single one of those examples is both valid and - I believe, at least - misunderstood. Musk has a singular goal as far as I can tell: to make humanity a multi-planetary species. All of those things are testing the boundaries of what's possible in areas that will or could be very important for building a permanent settlement on Mars. I posit that while there's much room for debate around whether or not those proj…

I'm sorry, you'll have to do an awful lot of explaining to do if you want me to believe Hyperloop, a 100+ year idea proven not to work, and the Vegas Loop, one of the most asinine infrastructure projects I've ever witnessed in my life, could possibly in any way whatsoever contribute to life on Mars

Terrain is the best available protection on Mars from radiation, and is it's far easier to pressurize a structure excavated from bedrock than it is to pressurize a dome or similar.

Hyperloop and the Vegas Loop are projects used to justify the existence of the Boring Company. The Boring Company's tech is definitely relevant to extraterrestrial habitat creation.

Post reply on HN