Earlier quoted context omitted.
There is no other mode of transportation cheaper than shipping across the ocean.
That one is subsidized by externalizing costs to our lungs.
So is pace travel. Then rockets are not green!
SpaceX says it has agreement to acquire Cursor for $60B
441–450 of 1001 posts
Re: SpaceX says it has agreement to acquire Cursor for $60B
#442Earlier quoted context omitted.
The entire space launch market is about $20B with multiple competitors in 2025. And by the most generous estimates it is going to be $80B by 2035. They can reuse the rockets as much as they like, the company isn’t worth $1.7T.
How can you say “The company isn’t worth X”? Isn’t the company worth exactly as much as people are willing to pay for its shares? I don’t personally think Google is worth $4T but the share price says otherwise.
> Isn’t the company worth exactly as much as people are willing to pay for its shares?
Really? We're still making claims like this in the year of our Lord 2026? People in the markets today are not predicting the real value of a company, they're gambling that the various political and financial machinations from people like Elon Musk will increase the share price enough that they can sell at a profit. The value of shares like Tesla are utterly disconnected from the value of the underlying business.
Re: SpaceX says it has agreement to acquire Cursor for $60B
#443Earlier quoted context omitted.
Tesla is profitable, as a matter of public record. And SpaceX is, by all accounts, extremely profitable.
They had like $16B in revenue last year, half from Starlink. That’s just money in the door and the underwriters seem to think the business is worth $1.75T.
About those underwriters - to quote the venerable Charlie Munger "they will sell 'shit' as long as 'shit' can be sold".
Re: SpaceX says it has agreement to acquire Cursor for $60B
#444Another one bites the dust.
Re: SpaceX says it has agreement to acquire Cursor for $60B
#445Earlier quoted context omitted.
In 2024 Gwynne Shotwell said Starlink had a $600 million positive free cash flow based on $8.2 billion in revenue. Last year revenue estimates from both SpaceX and from outside people adding up new military contracts came out to about $11.8 billion. Their fixed costs haven't gone up much, so the big unknown is development costs for military contracts. I think $2 billion is a reasonable, conservative estimate.
How much of that are they sinking into Starship?
Hopefully all of it. If Starship succeeds, and that seems incredibly likely given the tests thus far, it will create an entire industry.
People underestimate how much ships changed the world. It will happen again, the only question is when.
Re: SpaceX says it has agreement to acquire Cursor for $60B
#446Don't see how this works out financially.
Re: SpaceX says it has agreement to acquire Cursor for $60B
#447Re: SpaceX says it has agreement to acquire Cursor for $60B
#448Earlier quoted context omitted.
The entire space launch market is about $20B with multiple competitors in 2025. And by the most generous estimates it is going to be $80B by 2035. They can reuse the rockets as much as they like, the company isn’t worth $1.7T.
How can you say “The company isn’t worth X”? Isn’t the company worth exactly as much as people are willing to pay for its shares? I don’t personally think Google is worth $4T but the share price says otherwise.
When someone says that it usually means they believe the price is bound to drop.
Re: SpaceX says it has agreement to acquire Cursor for $60B
#449Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's not the same at all. Do you know how an IPO roadshow works at all or are you just spouting bullshit?
If roadshows guaranteed accurate valuations, pets.com wouldn’t liquidate within a year of IPO. Again, not debating that SpaceX isn’t a legit company or that it’s profitable. But underwriters agreeing with high valuations to stocks that collapse once they go public isn’t unheard of. Edit: and I will concede that I should’ve phrased my initial thoughts better. Credit rating agencies and underwriters do very separate th…
You said: "underwriters ... doing the same thing as the credit agencies did in 2008 by giving underwater mortgage backed securities a AAA rating"
That isn't what is happening at all.
In an IPO the underwriters and the company collaborate to set the price based on approximate demand and what they want the quality of the holders to look like.
In the roadshow, the company is very constrained as to what they can say or disclose outside of the scope of the S-1. They can't include MNPI, forward looking financial projections, etc. Underwriters are also prohibited from sharing MNPI, or publishing marketing disguised as research.
So I guess if you're saying the SpaceX S-1 is completely full of shit and there's hidden risk in it, than it could be similar to 2008, but in this case nobody is manufacturing a rating, and those material misrepresentations would constitute securities fraud. Investment banks and ratings agencies aren't the same thing at all, and the buyers of marginally profitable IPO stocks are (hopefully) different than those of AAA MBS.
Re: SpaceX says it has agreement to acquire Cursor for $60B
#450Earlier quoted context omitted.
SpaceX reuses its boosters 20+ times. Surely the depreciation is tiny when compared to the revenue of 60M+ per launch?
Depreciation isn't the only thing that matters. R&D, manufacturing, maintenance, fuel, launch, support staff, and I'm sure there are countless others. I'm not saying they aren't profitable. I don't know, but it's definitely not a given.
They did report FCF before xai and also invested at least $1B before they merged xai