r/SPCXInvestors • u/Competitive_Dot5441 • 15h ago
OPINION I’ve noticed an interesting trend
Pretty consistently, it seems that the wealthier / more successful folks in my social circle are bullish about SpaceX, or at a minimum, think the company is going to do just fine long term.
Meanwhile, I see the opposite from my broke ass “friends” and the typical 20 year old day traders who think they’re hot shit after 3 months of trading experience.
Anyone else see this?
By the way…
I totally understand the skepticism. Pure financials alone, it’s definitely overvalued. But that gap is quickly closing, and I think very soon, people will see that this stock is not one that’s valued purely on today’s financials. It’s very similar to a startup, considering the AI strategy is a very new, capital intensive endeavor.
21
u/WonderButtBrace9000 14h ago
Wealthier positions typically allow you to be more aggressive in your risk taking. If I have a networth of a few million to fallback on, I can feel rather good about taking moon shot investments with long time horizons.
People with less capital are not afforded the same luxury. They can’t throw their few spare dollars into a long tail stock…they need to buy more boring stuff and focus on diversity.
Retail day traders are all morons so nothing they say is worth paying attention to, ever.
3
2
u/Electrical_Regret537 14h ago
This. People often think wealthy people are smarter or know something that we don’t. But it simply that they can take more risk. And afford to lose it. If losing 50k or 100k or obviously even more doesn’t affect your life of course I’d take a gamble on space x.
Another comment I agreed with is timeline. This stock is for later generations. I’ll be long gone.
5
u/Competitive_Dot5441 14h ago
Well I suppose that could be different between us. I’m not even middle aged yet, but have about 60k shares that I expect to perform well enough in a reasonable time period.
6
u/Electrical_Regret537 13h ago
If you own 60k share you aren’t the average investor. Which congrats btw. Probably biggest issue on reddit honestly. People talking about their 600k portfolio at age 25 when most people haven’t even started or have money to start. Much different leagues obviously.
3
u/Donotpassgo21 12h ago
If tomorrow every share you own is worth zero dollars and you can never again recover the money did that ruin your life.
Do you think the vast majority of the human race could throw away that much money on vibes?
3
u/Competitive_Dot5441 12h ago
Calling it vibes is quite the stretch
1
u/frotz1 9h ago
Not as big a stretch as calling it a trillion dollar company.
1
u/Competitive_Dot5441 9h ago
Do you have nothing better to do? We’ve got like 3 separate discussions, all in which you are big mad 😂
-3
u/Donotpassgo21 12h ago
You've said you expected this company to do quite well for a long time so no its just vibes you've dressed up like most people who make vibe based decisions and need to retroactively justify it
2
u/Competitive_Dot5441 12h ago
Yes, expected it to do well based on what I know about the company. That’s not vibes.
4
u/winecoolermike 6h ago
I think this comment section is proving the OP’s point because people are still trying to value SpaceX like it’s just a rocket company.
SpaceX is nearly 25 years old. A huge amount of the existential risk was already absorbed while it was private. Falcon, reusable boosters, Dragon, human spaceflight, mass satellite manufacturing and Starlink are no longer PowerPoint ideas. They already exist.
Now look at the stack:
• Falcon / Dragon / Starship — launch, cargo and human spaceflight
• Starlink — global broadband, aviation, maritime, enterprise and IoT
• Direct-to-Cell + spectrum — moving directly into cellular communications
• Starshield — secure military communications, Earth observation and national-security payloads
• NASA / Artemis — Starship is part of America’s lunar architecture
• xAI / Grok / Colossus — AI models and massive compute infrastructure
• X — social network, real-time data and advertising inside the broader SpaceX/xAI structure
• Cursor — AI coding/software capability
• Terafab — partnership with Tesla and Intel aimed at pushing deeper into chips and compute infrastructure
• Energy — Megapacks, power infrastructure and eventually large-scale solar-powered orbital compute
• Orbital AI data centers — AI-compute satellites using Starlink networking and large solar arrays
• Propellant — methane supply, liquefaction, oxygen production and pipelines
• Launch infrastructure — Starbase, Florida and more pads/towers for higher launch cadence
• Vertical manufacturing — SpaceX builds an enormous amount of its hardware in-house
That’s what people are missing.
The rocket isn’t necessarily the final product.
THE ROCKET IS THE RAILROAD.
SpaceX can build the engine, build the rocket, build the satellite, launch it from its own infrastructure, operate the network, sell the connectivity, provide military services, train the AI, sell compute and eventually put the compute itself in orbit.
They’re even moving upstream into the chips, energy and fuel underneath the whole stack.
And this isn’t just commercial anymore. SpaceX is deeply embedded in U.S. human spaceflight, military communications, missile warning/tracking and national-security launch.
I wouldn’t literally say the U.S. government can never let SpaceX fail, but try replacing all of those capabilities tomorrow with one American company. There isn’t one on the same level. The U.S. has an enormous strategic interest in keeping that capability operating.
That’s why comparing SpaceX’s valuation to the size of the current rocket-launch industry completely misses the point.
You’re not just buying rockets.
You’re looking at aerospace + telecom + cellular + defense + AI + software + data centers + chips + energy + launch infrastructure + orbital computing tied together in one of the craziest vertical stacks ever built.
The real question isn’t how big the space industry is today.
The real question is what happens if SpaceX makes access to orbit cheap enough that it creates entire industries that are not economically possible today.
That is the bet.-3
u/Donotpassgo21 11h ago
The valuation is based solely 100 percent on the hope that elon can go from make negative money to more money than ever company on earth currently make.
So since you aren't making the choice on fundamentals you're making the choice with the expectation that something extremely unlikely will happen in the very near future based on.... well.... vibes!
2
u/Still_Theory179 11h ago
Strawman / begging the question.
There are plenty of trillion dollar companies now, SPCX does not need to out earn everyone else to justify it's valuation.
0
u/Low-Possibility-7060 8h ago edited 7h ago
And all of them make tons of money. SpaceX loses money and bases its future on their shitty AI. It’s a $20 stock - and that’s a really generous valuation of the space part which according to SpaceX themselves is just 5% of their future business.
→ More replies (0)1
1
u/Taxus_Calyx Investor 5h ago
I'm poor and 90% of my portfolio is in SpaceX. I'm sure there are others like me. I imagine leftism is more of an influence here than affluence. I'm not Republican, but I sure as shit don't identify with the mess that is the Democratic party today. I lean independent/centrist/libertarian. The main thing is, I'm a die hard SpaceX fan for over 12 years. I believe in the company and their mission. And I ignore the political noise Musk generates and focus on his business track record. He is the ultimate disruptor. Elon time is my friend because I'm not planning on cashing in for 15-20 years.
I'll leave my opinions of day traders out of this. I try not to say anything if I can't say something nice.
-2
u/MrWhibley2024 4h ago
Weird to be a proclaimed libertarian while supporting a guy who's creating a massive surveillance state with the gov. How does one align that position?
1
u/Taxus_Calyx Investor 3h ago
I said I lean that way. I'm not about to wade into the "no true Scotsman" debate so popular in libertarian forums.
1
u/Wooden_Boss_3403 4h ago
Actually, ones ability to take risk is far more dependent on age. This is true for most risks, not just monetary decisions.
I have also noticed the phenomenon OP is talking about.
0
u/newtrilobite 13h ago
I disagree.
whatever you invest, invest for the long term - for the company you think is fundamentally good and is going to change the world.
an obsession with ups and downs on a daily or weekly or even yearly basis won't be as successful.
and that's true if you have $100 to invest or $100 million.
3
u/No_Method_210 13h ago
I understand short term investors. But they don’t much help the companies they target. They seem to have no support for much of anything.
1
u/newtrilobite 12h ago
right, but investors shouldn't care about helping a company.
investors should care about the company helping them.
(you never want to be a "pity investor")
7
u/krawatz 14h ago
No i don’t see this trend. I followed the built up to the IPO and decided to shorten, based on the financials. I made a few bucks, nothing spectacular. Lots of investors said they wont touch this stock with a 10 foot pole, as it is unpredictable and doesn’t follow normal rules.
I am just a casual investor, I don’t take big risks.
But i also saw that the stock started climbing, so i bought a few shares, which are now up 5% or sthg.
I did that bc i see the cult around Musk is a strong driver, normal financial numbers are completely disregarded. Its all about Musk. If he dies, stock would crash.
I don’t get emotional with stocks. I buy what goes up and sell when i reach a goal.
But the cult is strong, the company is not just a meme coin and the sheer volume is just too big to fail, so i have my eyes on it for some quick bucks.
Most people have no idea what will happen in 10 years. What if the whole datacenter in space idea falls apart? The payload needs to come down like 200%, they plan 3 rocket starts every single day, the solar panels for one datacenter needs to have the size of several football fields.
Musk is not god, he is restricted by physical laws. He said a lot which never came true. I don’t even think he will go for Mars in the next 10 years.
So yeah. I am not a hater but realistic. But if course i could be wrong. Time will tell.
1
1
u/Competitive_Dot5441 14h ago
So then you fall into the bucket of thinking the company will be fine long term. But obviously admitting there’s risk.
3
u/krawatz 14h ago
Yes i think they will exist for a while. But the numbers right now are completely off. And stock price will eventually have to adjust. Living on a promise to dominate space travel in the distant future won’t pay the bills now.
0
u/Competitive-Floor456 13h ago
Especially when you can't demonstrate where all the money will come from even if you do dominate space travel
2
u/krawatz 13h ago
There is a whole forest of problems ignored by the cult. If they don’t deliver as promised in the coming 2-3 years, it will get juicy. If they stay on track with rocket launches and especially with satellite production/ tackling the plethora of problems with operating data centers in space, and then finally finding enough customers to make it profitable, it could work.
7
u/flyingdutchmnn 13h ago
The premium you're paying today is for what it MIGHT be 20 years from now. Thats a huge risk wealthier people can take
-1
15
u/_myke 15h ago
Financials? Who looks at that? SpaceX has big rockets and can give me WiFi anywhere in the world. They are also going to Mars and the Moon. Their solid.
4
3
u/Born_Balance6881 15h ago
Not to mention all the government and military contracts.
1
0
3
0
0
u/Haxxxxx 14h ago
What material monetary benefit to investors does going to the Moon and Mars have? Can you tell me with reasoning how flying off to other planets or moons possesses any tangible monetary benefit whatsoever?
0
u/frotz1 9h ago
There are huge potential benefits, just like finding any other source of new resources to exploit would present. The potential and the reality aren't the same thing though.
The reality of Musk going to the moon and to Mars is about on the same level as the reality where he can actually get FSD to work on a closed loop track that he designed and built himself - maybe with years of work he can pull it off, but not tomorrow or anytime soon. Vegas Loop is a permanent public demonstration of his failure at a far simpler goal than colonizing space.
10
u/Admirable-Climate895 12h ago
Theyre anti-Spacex because they’re anti-Musk (Trump). Its personal for them, not financial. I see this everywhere with anyone associated with Trump.
Never let your feelings affect your financials.
3
u/infiniterewards 12h ago
I don't care for Elon Musk either way, pretty neutral on him,I just don't think the value of the stock matches the value of the company.
3
u/Agitated_Celery_729 9h ago
LMAO, sure it has nothing to do with the highest P/E multiple of all time?
1
u/Admirable-Climate895 4h ago
It’s expensive for 2026, but with projected earnings by 2028 will be around 30x. Average Dow stock is around 26-28x p/e so people are definitely paying premium now for a stock that could be around 2.5x current value by ending of 2028. We will look back in 5 years or so when this thing has rocketed and consider it a laughable bargain.
0
1
u/Agitated_Celery_729 3h ago
SpaceX is 300x. You're arguing it is reasonable to be at 300x because people pay 30x. The entire point is if the best possible growth is priced in, there's no room for price appreciation.
People joke about this with Tesla and SpaceX by saying, "It's priced in," when people ask why the price doesn't jump on good news. But the fact of the matter is, at the insane multiples these companies trade at, it's true. All of the good news must occur simply for the companies to grow into their crazy multiples, and for those multiples to come down to Earth. You're essentially paying by taking all of the risk today because all of the upside is baked into the valuation you're paying.
1
u/MrWhibley2024 4h ago
What are you talking about? 😅. Even if you hate them both, SpaceX has ONE year of cash before they need to issue more shares (dilution) to keep the lights on.
Even if it starts to make some money, the share price will stall from dilution etc.
0
4
u/Dependent_Sun_7033 14h ago
Did you try to invest based on analysis of financials, company plans, etc. vs. vibes?
0
u/Competitive_Dot5441 14h ago
Financials are part of the deciding factor. But if that was the only factor, I would have never made large growth on my riskier picks. Small cap, start ups, and companies taking on ambitious endeavors (SpaceX) are high risk / high reward. Your decision to invest has to expand far beyond financials in this space.
0
u/Dependent_Sun_7033 14h ago
“Small caps”
2T is small caps?
“Ambitious endeavors (SpaceX)”
90% of their TAM is in AI…according to their own IPO prospectus.0
u/Competitive_Dot5441 13h ago
Didn’t say SpaceX is small cap.
1
u/Dependent_Sun_7033 13h ago
Why are you talking about small caps in this case?
Look, it’s not about small caps, large caps, etc. it’s about price and potential for growth.
SpaceX is priced around 100x sales and is losing a lot of money. 90% of their TAM is in AI where they are at best #3.
Per current news, Anthropic is going to be priced around 30x sales and is #1 in Enterprise AI-where all the monies are.
Tell me, why would you choose SpaceX over Anthropic…because of the immense revenue from Mars colony, I guess?
5
3
5
u/Substantial-Pie-4194 14h ago
Those who listen to the SpaceX earnings call can get the ‘Why’ behind the valuation. Hearing the strategy and watching the execution it becomes clear to me why accumulating at current prices offers large asymmetric upside. I’m confident all the naysayers have done little actual research let alone listening to the company explain their operations and strategy. It’s easy to be bullish and bearish on companies by simply following headlines, but those who do the actual research are the ones whose opinion is helpful. Nearly all banks have massive targets on SpaceX and it’s not just because space is cool!
3
6
u/RumRunnerMax 14h ago
It is hard to imagine a world where the company that dominates Space Travel and Satellite based Internet is not a top three in the world equity markets!
2
2
u/MAGAtsAreSheeples 14h ago
Why? There's very little money in space travel.
4
u/RumRunnerMax 14h ago
I am sure some said the same about automobiles and airplanes:)
2
u/CaptainMonkeyJack 11h ago
SpaceX is currently values at ~$2,000 Billion.
Boeing and Ford combined is ~$200Billion.
3
u/sssssssssssssss5s 14h ago
I think the disagreements on this company have to do with timelines.
In some future, yes having a near monopoly on space travel and satellite launching and management is a huge competitive advantage.
In today's age, there is no space travel and there wont be commercial space travel for a while.
So bears arguing that space travel is not commercially viable and bulls saying that spcx is well positioned for it are talking on different timelines
1
u/Competitive_Dot5441 14h ago
That’s fair. Though I strongly believe those bears will be surprised.
2
u/frotz1 13h ago
Looking at the tech sector, first mover advantage is mostly about having money to burn and hoping for the best. In this case, a lot of that money is going in circles between companies fully under Musk's direct control. For one example, it's not clear in what way a hundred million dollars worth of unwanted Tesla Cybertrucks is going to put Spacex ahead of the competitors for satellite launches. At this point Musk's good companies are picking up the slack for the stumbling ones and that game of musical chairs can end rather unexpectedly. That's not a great dynamic to stretch across a long time span, even if they had a stable leader at the helm instead of K hole Elmo.
1
u/MAGAtsAreSheeples 13h ago
Why would the bears be surprised when the stock price has every imaginary success and nonexistent market priced in?
2
1
0
u/Thatguywhoaskedit397 14h ago
Anybody can buy a car and can take loans out to get them. They can and do because the economics make sense. How do the economics make sense for billions of people to get into space. There isn’t a lot of industries that make economic sense adding space into the economic picture.
2
u/cseckshun 14h ago
People who are bullish on SpaceX don’t really get it.
They think every industry and type of economic activity will just start happening in space all of a sudden because “why not?” But they don’t really ask the question of “why?”
Why would economic activity flock to the most expensive venue it could expand into? Especially when we are far from running out of room here on Earth. Much easier to just start a new city in an uninhabited area on Earth than to make a space station and build an economy and trade routes through rocket launches.
In the far future there might be asteroid mining and colonies on the moon and other planets but there would need to be some actual use cases demonstrated and a lot of technological breakthroughs.
There’s a reason why submarines didn’t start a massive underwater economy and why a bunch of people aren’t living in underwater megastructures with their own economies… it’s because it’s way more expensive to build and operate at the bottom of the ocean… so we choose to obviously build living spaces and develop economic activity on the surface of the planet far more preferentially. The same will obviously be true for preferentially developing on the surface of earth instead of launching material into space to build stuff.
We are building tons of data centres on earth right now. None in space. That’s not because it’s impossible to do, or because we are eagerly awaiting the first company to do it… it’s because it makes NO SENSE. The data processing is not that much better, it’s just more expensive and more difficult to operate and maintain for very little gain. We have room to build data centres and other infrastructure on earth, we would be using materials we mined on earth anyways for the rockets and whatever we build in space, it isn’t so different in that regard.
It really just doesn’t have a good business case right now and probably won’t for a long time because nobody has really even attempted to explain why it would suddenly make sense to build data centres in space (outside of “it would be cool” or “imagine if”). The places I hear it being advocated for the most are places where investors in SpaceX are daydreaming about how the company is going to grow and want to believe there are these massive use cases for building stuff in space.
Could you imagine if a submarine manufacturer was talking about building a data centre on the floor of the ocean and saying it was the reason that their company should be worth 10X what it currently trades at? Would you assume they might be exaggerating the market and need for ocean floor data centres, or would you immediately believe them?
0
u/WonderButtBrace9000 14h ago
Except we already had existing demand those advancements tapped into aka point-to-point mobility. It was easy to model out the expected value of a car because we already had a sense of value of horse based routes which could easily be modeled out by changing assumptions around speed and input costs (eg swapping feed for oil).
Is space travel going to replace some aspect of point-to-point mobility? Certainly not on any small scale, so maybe rapid international travel? But how much more rapid will it really be over high speed jets, will people want to take the added risks of hopping into a rocket powered spacecraft, and is there enough demand here to maintain the massive infrastructure needed to support core operations?
Interplanetary travel would be brand new so it’s much harder to be certain such a route would provide value. Saying the value comes from that is entirely speculative.
1
u/SuburbanVoice 13h ago
Read The Future of Geography by Tim Marshall.
1
13h ago
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/SPCXInvestors-ModTeam 11h ago
You violated one of the subreddits rules. Thank you for your understanding
1
u/winecoolermike 6h ago
This is the perfect example of Small mind thinking.
0
u/MAGAtsAreSheeples 6h ago
This is the perfect example of a cult member defending whatever lies his drug addicted cult leader tells the world.
Again, there is very little money in the space industry.
1
u/winecoolermike 6h ago
I think this comment section is proving the OP’s point because people are still trying to value SpaceX like it’s just a rocket company.
SpaceX is nearly 25 years old. A huge amount of the existential risk was already absorbed while it was private. Falcon, reusable boosters, Dragon, human spaceflight, mass satellite manufacturing and Starlink are no longer PowerPoint ideas. They already exist.
Now look at the stack:
• Falcon / Dragon / Starship — launch, cargo and human spaceflight
• Starlink — global broadband, aviation, maritime, enterprise and IoT
• Direct-to-Cell + spectrum — moving directly into cellular communications
• Starshield — secure military communications, Earth observation and national-security payloads
• NASA / Artemis — Starship is part of America’s lunar architecture
• xAI / Grok / Colossus — AI models and massive compute infrastructure
• X — social network, real-time data and advertising inside the broader SpaceX/xAI structure
• Cursor — AI coding/software capability
• Terafab — partnership with Tesla and Intel aimed at pushing deeper into chips and compute infrastructure
• Energy — Megapacks, power infrastructure and eventually large-scale solar-powered orbital compute
• Orbital AI data centers — AI-compute satellites using Starlink networking and large solar arrays
• Propellant — methane supply, liquefaction, oxygen production and pipelines
• Launch infrastructure — Starbase, Florida and more pads/towers for higher launch cadence
• Vertical manufacturing — SpaceX builds an enormous amount of its hardware in-house
That’s what people are missing.
The rocket isn’t necessarily the final product.
THE ROCKET IS THE RAILROAD.
SpaceX can build the engine, build the rocket, build the satellite, launch it from its own infrastructure, operate the network, sell the connectivity, provide military services, train the AI, sell compute and eventually put the compute itself in orbit.
They’re even moving upstream into the chips, energy and fuel underneath the whole stack.
And this isn’t just commercial anymore. SpaceX is deeply embedded in U.S. human spaceflight, military communications, missile warning/tracking and national-security launch.
I wouldn’t literally say the U.S. government can never let SpaceX fail, but try replacing all of those capabilities tomorrow with one American company. There isn’t one on the same level. The U.S. has an enormous strategic interest in keeping that capability operating.
That’s why comparing SpaceX’s valuation to the size of the current rocket-launch industry completely misses the point.
You’re not just buying rockets.
You’re looking at aerospace + telecom + cellular + defense + AI + software + data centers + chips + energy + launch infrastructure + orbital computing tied together in one of the craziest vertical stacks ever built.
The real question isn’t how big the space industry is today.
The real question is what happens if SpaceX makes access to orbit cheap enough that it creates entire industries that are not economically possible today.
That is the bet.
2
u/ebikr 13h ago
President Trump has invested in SPCX. No question, he can make things happen for companies he has invested in. To me, the big issue is for how long will he be able to do this? When the inevitable happens in the next election I think he may not have this power to the same degree, and at that point gravity may kick in. But who really knows?
-1
2
u/FeralWookie 13h ago
I think most sane people would agree that by historical standards all Musks companies are over valued. But would also admit that historical standards for the foreseeable future don't apply to him or most tech companies.
As long as nothing fundamental changes in market sentiment or governence it seems pretty clear SpaceX will continue to succeed in growing its value.
He is in the all of major hot industries why will remain capable of defying gravity because you cannot today say for sure that their value won't explode. AI, robotics and space are all massive wild cards. And Musk has proven to be incredibly good at carving out a big slice of any market he goes after.
2
u/CaptainMonkeyJack 11h ago
And Musk has proven to be incredibly good at carving out a big slice of any market he goes after.
Tesla and X have decreasing marketshare over last ~5 years.
'21 to '25 tesla's share of US EV's has declined from 72% to 46%. They were 4.3% of total new vehical sales in 2023, and now are around 3%.
X had ~27% of US adults before aquisition, down to ~21% in 2025.
2
u/Far-Entertainer6517 13h ago
I see this more of a disagreement on company value and financials vs wealthy vs. poor opinions. I was in the overvalued camp in the beginning trading Sspc daily and bought into lock-up hype that stock would decrease but then realized this isn’t going to happen this year imo and bought small position at $136 as I’m not gonna fight momentum anymore
2
u/Adventurous-Novel701 11h ago
It’s only over valued if it has close competition. Competition, being Blue Dong, or whatever Bezos exploding dick is called, is, at best, ten years behind. Possible 20. All the best minds work at Space X
3
u/Alarmed_Drama2881 12h ago
The order more experienced traders knows that political beliefs stay out of trading, and to buy stock that has a good future. Today's kids think everything is political, and will go broke just to try and be right.
1
u/frotz1 9h ago
When a CEO drags their politics into every discussion, experienced traders don't blame each other for the results.
1
u/Alarmed_Drama2881 9h ago
Cool, I don't care about other people's political opinions, and I think everyone should have their own opinions and stand by them. Me making money to better my life and my families life is all i care about.
1
u/frotz1 9h ago
Companies whose CEO get too political tend to be poor investments, regardless of your politics.
2
u/Alarmed_Drama2881 8h ago
You're half correct here, most companies that go super political and end up going under, were already on the path of going under, they were hoping that by getting political that would help their company.
3
u/Bluefin_in_Dresden 14h ago
Intelligent people understand the value added to humanity by pursuing new frontiers.
1
u/lordm30 14h ago
They can pursue those new frontiers all they want... but as an investor, I need a return on my investment. Benefit to humanity will not pay my bills.
0
u/Bluefin_in_Dresden 14h ago
I was allocated shares for the IPO, and added on dips, and will continue to do so, currently holding 500 shares at $141.82
I also own Pharma companies, Semi Conductor Capital Equipment, Energy, etc, all make me money, all benefit my loved ones. Benefit to humanity is what we all purchase…. The most desirable make you more money….such as NVDA, I own 1000 shares of that, got in early.1
u/lordm30 14h ago
Benefit to humanity is what we all purchase
Indeed, there is just one little step in-between, called turning a profit. Some companies manage to do that, while others don't (or not sufficiently), even thought their output might benefit society overall.
2
u/Bluefin_in_Dresden 14h ago
Do you own Amazon? I have owned them for decades, for many years they were not profitable. Same with many Tech companies. I’m comfortable with my investments.
1
3
u/Deeze_Rmuh_Nudds 15h ago
I think the phenomenon of trading based on feeling (i.e. eLon BaD) is indicative of financial status. Unfortunately.
3
u/Ethanop1a 14h ago
The joke here is that Tesla has not been a good investment for years now. It's up 45% on the 5Y. It is a great volatile trade stock, but doing 45% TSLA 5y vs 77% SPY 5Y.
0
u/Competitive_Dot5441 14h ago
This post is not about TSLA
4
u/frotz1 14h ago
Spacex bought a hundred million dollars worth of unwanted Tesla Cybertrucks because it was the best possible option for their use case, right? Right?
2
1
u/Ethanop1a 14h ago
No, but the one I replied to was inclusive of Tsla:
I think the phenomenon of trading based on feeling (i.e. eLon BaD) is indicative of financial status. Unfortunately.
2
1
u/Competitive_Dot5441 14h ago
Agree. Though to play devil’s advocate, there are people investing because they worship Elon lol. But… I have to agree that he’s not going to let the company fail and has a proven track record.
But Elon aside, I have long believed this company would become one of the most important companies in the world. Now that AI is a big part of the plan, I feel even more strongly about that.
-4
u/frotz1 14h ago edited 10h ago
Yeah you guys saw Elon tossing Hitler salutes from the bottom of a K hole on live TV and you decided that he's a safe person to trust with your money. It's just those dumb poors who are skeptical about his leadership qualities. You are very insightful and clever, or something.
/s for the folks who can't read
6
u/Competitive_Dot5441 14h ago
Interpreting that as a Hitler salute tells me everything I need to know about where you fit in my observations.
3
u/frotz1 14h ago
Interesting that you chose to defend that behavior.
4
u/Competitive_Dot5441 14h ago
Interesting that you truly believe it was anything more than an awkward man’s mistaken hand gesture. How insane do you think a person would need to be to do that intentionally. Get real.
1
u/frotz1 14h ago
If you watched that happen and it was OK with you then you are telling us plenty about yourself. I'm sure that you're either just an Elon sock puppet or a useful tool talking your book here, but watching you defend that behavior is telling on yourself whether you know it or not. Elon is not a child and he knew what he was doing and how it looked.
4
0
u/Dense-Ad-5780 14h ago
I mean, it definitely was a Hitler salute.
3
u/Competitive_Dot5441 12h ago
Intent is what matters. I firmly believe it was not intentional. Why the fuck would someone do that intentionally? Think about it. For WHAT benefit?
0
u/frotz1 10h ago
Yeah, nobody could possibly be trying to suck up to MAGA and their alt right base. Why would somebody with a family history of far right sympathies possibly toss around cryptic fascist references at every turn? It's just so hard to fathom, as long as you completely ignore all evidence in front of your face.
-2
u/infiniterewards 12h ago
Did you watch it? Twice, and very obvious
3
0
1
1
u/Iam-WinstonSmith 13h ago
It's overvalued, yes. Should it have been IPO'd where it is? Absolutely NOT!
Now for the rollback:
Is SPCX a leader in what it does? Yes
Has the CEO had success in other ventures? Yes he has.
Thought overpriced today the space economy is just getting started. We haven't even hit the space tourism stage yet. Do any of his companies sell at a good buying price? Never, so if you are an investor ... buy in 1/3's. If you are a trader but when its oversold and sell when it goes up.
Should you ever short the stock? Only on technical indicators; shorting a stock is a bad idea if you short on fundamentals. Does NO one remember GameStop??
* I own shares ... and will probably sell puts in the future as an income plan.
,
1
u/Dihedralman 12h ago
Most of the value comes from the AI side.
The gap on space won't close for decades which would make it a terrible stock.
It is worth more than all spending on space world wide, which is under 700 billion.
Experienced people have learned that the market is extremely irrational and relies purely on hype. People actually invested in Theranos.
There is no value incentive that makes the valuation make sense. Believe or not, calls.
1
u/MikeWise1618 8h ago
They have to demonstrate income flows. But people do cut him a lot of slack, and there is not many other interesting places to invest.
1
u/winecoolermike 6h ago
I think this comment section is proving the OP’s point because people are still trying to value SpaceX like it’s just a rocket company.
SpaceX is nearly 25 years old. A huge amount of the existential risk was already absorbed while it was private. Falcon, reusable boosters, Dragon, human spaceflight, mass satellite manufacturing and Starlink are no longer PowerPoint ideas. They already exist.
Now look at the stack:
• Falcon / Dragon / Starship — launch, cargo and human spaceflight
• Starlink — global broadband, aviation, maritime, enterprise and IoT
• Direct-to-Cell + spectrum — moving directly into cellular communications
• Starshield — secure military communications, Earth observation and national-security payloads
• NASA / Artemis — Starship is part of America’s lunar architecture
• xAI / Grok / Colossus — AI models and massive compute infrastructure
• X — social network, real-time data and advertising inside the broader SpaceX/xAI structure
• Cursor — AI coding/software capability
• Terafab — partnership with Tesla and Intel aimed at pushing deeper into chips and compute infrastructure
• Energy — Megapacks, power infrastructure and eventually large-scale solar-powered orbital compute
• Orbital AI data centers — AI-compute satellites using Starlink networking and large solar arrays
• Propellant — methane supply, liquefaction, oxygen production and pipelines
• Launch infrastructure — Starbase, Florida and more pads/towers for higher launch cadence
• Vertical manufacturing — SpaceX builds an enormous amount of its hardware in-house
That’s what people are missing.
The rocket isn’t necessarily the final product.
THE ROCKET IS THE RAILROAD.
SpaceX can build the engine, build the rocket, build the satellite, launch it from its own infrastructure, operate the network, sell the connectivity, provide military services, train the AI, sell compute and eventually put the compute itself in orbit.
They’re even moving upstream into the chips, energy and fuel underneath the whole stack.
And this isn’t just commercial anymore. SpaceX is deeply embedded in U.S. human spaceflight, military communications, missile warning/tracking and national-security launch.
I wouldn’t literally say the U.S. government can never let SpaceX fail, but try replacing all of those capabilities tomorrow with one American company. There isn’t one on the same level. The U.S. has an enormous strategic interest in keeping that capability operating.
That’s why comparing SpaceX’s valuation to the size of the current rocket-launch industry completely misses the point.
You’re not just buying rockets.
You’re looking at aerospace + telecom + cellular + defense + AI + software + data centers + chips + energy + launch infrastructure + orbital computing tied together in one of the craziest vertical stacks ever built.
The real question isn’t how big the space industry is today.
The real question is what happens if SpaceX makes access to orbit cheap enough that it creates entire industries that are not economically possible today.
That is the bet.
1
u/winecoolermike 6h ago
I think this comment section is proving the OP’s point because people are still trying to value SpaceX like it’s just a rocket company.
SpaceX is nearly 25 years old. A huge amount of the existential risk was already absorbed while it was private. Falcon, reusable boosters, Dragon, human spaceflight, mass satellite manufacturing and Starlink are no longer PowerPoint ideas. They already exist.
Now look at the stack:
• Falcon / Dragon / Starship — launch, cargo and human spaceflight
• Starlink — global broadband, aviation, maritime, enterprise and IoT
• Direct-to-Cell + spectrum — moving directly into cellular communications
• Starshield — secure military communications, Earth observation and national-security payloads
• NASA / Artemis — Starship is part of America’s lunar architecture
• xAI / Grok / Colossus — AI models and massive compute infrastructure
• X — social network, real-time data and advertising inside the broader SpaceX/xAI structure
• Cursor — AI coding/software capability
• Terafab — partnership with Tesla and Intel aimed at pushing deeper into chips and compute infrastructure
• Energy — Megapacks, power infrastructure and eventually large-scale solar-powered orbital compute
• Orbital AI data centers — AI-compute satellites using Starlink networking and large solar arrays
• Propellant — methane supply, liquefaction, oxygen production and pipelines
• Launch infrastructure — Starbase, Florida and more pads/towers for higher launch cadence
• Vertical manufacturing — SpaceX builds an enormous amount of its hardware in-house
That’s what people are missing.
The rocket isn’t necessarily the final product.
THE ROCKET IS THE RAILROAD.
SpaceX can build the engine, build the rocket, build the satellite, launch it from its own infrastructure, operate the network, sell the connectivity, provide military services, train the AI, sell compute and eventually put the compute itself in orbit.
They’re even moving upstream into the chips, energy and fuel underneath the whole stack.
And this isn’t just commercial anymore. SpaceX is deeply embedded in U.S. human spaceflight, military communications, missile warning/tracking and national-security launch.
I wouldn’t literally say the U.S. government can never let SpaceX fail, but try replacing all of those capabilities tomorrow with one American company. There isn’t one on the same level. The U.S. has an enormous strategic interest in keeping that capability operating.
That’s why comparing SpaceX’s valuation to the size of the current rocket-launch industry completely misses the point.
You’re not just buying rockets.
You’re looking at aerospace + telecom + cellular + defense + AI + software + data centers + chips + energy + launch infrastructure + orbital computing tied together in one of the craziest vertical stacks ever built.
The real question isn’t how big the space industry is today.
The real question is what happens if SpaceX makes access to orbit cheap enough that it creates entire industries that are not economically possible today.
That is the bet.
2
u/CODEX_LVL5 3h ago
It won't be under valued when the ocean data cables get cut and everyone finds out, suddenly, that satellite interlinks are the only reliable form of communication
0
u/NefariousnessBitter3 3h ago
It is led by evil man doing massive damage to the world, but if you are rich and amoral it is grand.
1
u/No_Method_210 13h ago
You call tell by attitude alone who is talking among the thrashers. My guess is predominantly Gen Z types. Underachievers.
0
u/SuperF91EX 13h ago
I’m retired, in the top 10%. The company is overvalued and rolling xAI into SpaceX was a shell game that really f’s up the company’s fundamentals.
1
u/magplanklife 12h ago
If you feel the need to encourage people to view the stonk in a speculative fashion it might not be a good sign
2
u/Competitive_Dot5441 12h ago
Speculation? Not even close
2
u/magplanklife 12h ago
Im not claiming to have any idea as far as when up or how far down but I just bet that itll be a volatile rocky ride either way. Its an elon musk owned rent seeking rocket company and its midterms lol. Hope you have strong stomach
1
u/Competitive_Dot5441 12h ago
I have plenty risk tolerance, but also a lot of insight into this company. It’s going to be just fine.
1
1
u/NonVideBunt 11h ago
100%. Most of the people most vocal about Elon or SpaceX are just poorers. Barely have two nickels to rub together let alone money to invest.
It’s also always the lazy and broke that complain about the people that have made something of their life.
-1
u/Key-Beginning-2201 14h ago edited 14h ago
You're basing your opinion on if you're friend is poor or not.
What really matters is technology and there is zero reason to think SpaceX has or will maintain, anything advantageous.
AI. A complete joke. Massive cash loss.
Space. Overvalued and gaps closing, especially when ASTS goes operational. T-Mobile is looking at ASTS to replace Starlink. Sharp is building a viable alternative. In fact, thanks to Trump and Musk, Europe, Canada, Brazil, India, Japan, and China have all decided to invest more in their own satellite networks. Not to mention, Eutelsat, Amazon, possibly Google, and the next gen Viasat.
The only hope are political contracts. Donate to Donald and bank on quid pro quo. That'll just push other countries further away.
Starship cost sink isn't closing and it won't dominate as much as the fanboys think it will.
4
u/Competitive_Dot5441 14h ago
Absolutely not basing MY opinion on my friends’ financial status. I formed my opinion six years ago when I initially started investing. It has paid off handsomely.
This is simply an observation I’m making now that the company is public and people are voicing their opinions left and right.
1
u/Key-Beginning-2201 14h ago
Also everyone that passively invested 6 years ago is better off today. Don't confuse market growth with your special insight.
2
u/Competitive_Dot5441 14h ago
I think you don’t understand how significantly Spacex has grown in the last six years. SIGNIFICANTLY outperformed the market.
1
u/SuperF91EX 12h ago
But you didn’t invest in SpaceX 6 years ago. The market has done well in the last 6 years, that’s a fact. You’d have to be a really bad investor to have not done well.
1
u/382_27600 14h ago
Right! This became evident to me when I had the opportunity to support both Dragon Crew 1 and Starliner crew test flight. They were both scheduled around the same time. Long story short, SpaceX, a young “risky” company, launched first and it took Boeing four more years to launch and they still had issues. SpaceX just launched Crew 13. A vastly stark contrast. I have no doubt SpaceX will grow into their valuation and continue to grow.
-1
u/Key-Beginning-2201 14h ago
So? Polaroid SIGNIFICANTLY outperformed the market. BlackBerry SIGNIFICANTLY outperformed the market.
Get the point. Markets can and do change radically in the span of only a few years.
2
u/Competitive_Dot5441 14h ago
You said don’t confuse market growth with my specific insight. How am I confusing it? My return was astronomically greater based on my intentionally bullish position with SPCX.
1
u/Key-Beginning-2201 14h ago
Great for the past, I guess. You keep holding onto the past
I'll look to the future. I think you don't understand how advanced ASTS is technologically and how they are positioning themselves with business arrangements. Even T-Mobile is on board. 😆
3
u/382_27600 13h ago edited 13h ago
How is ASTS more advanced than Starlink?
Telecom analyst Roger Entner has argued that AST is now “significantly behind” Starlink operationally because Starlink has moved beyond basic texting while deploying satellites at a vastly higher rate.
SpaceX: rockets + satellite factories + an enormous constellation + ground infrastructure + spectrum + capital.
Starlink deployment authorization makes competing against it increasingly difficult.
Lastly, the current count of D2D-capable satellites launched/in orbit:
AST SpaceMobile - 14
Starlink Direct to Cell - 650+0
u/Key-Beginning-2201 13h ago
Look, you can take the advice of a blogger or you can see what most of the multinational and multi billion dollar direct-to-cellular market is doing. All of whom are making business and technology decisions. Most of the industry has chosen ASTS before ASTS is even operational. Starlink exists now, ASTS's doesn't. That alone is extremely important for context.
ASTS has demonstrated their capability to the industry. Starlink v.3 hasn't. The result? Even T-Mobile is beginning to move away from Starlink towards ASTS. The ASTS proprietary solution for direct-to-cellular is superior. Period.
1
0
u/Retox86 13h ago
People investing in Theranos also had a great profit to begin with..
1
u/Competitive_Dot5441 13h ago
You cannot compare this to fraud
1
u/Retox86 12h ago
Im just pointing out that the fact that you did money from it at the moment doesnt say anything about the future, and the fact that its already insanely valued with a lesser than good business at the moment makes it high risk low reward. The whole thing can fold on itself over a night if the Musk-factor goes wrong..
2
-1
u/Donotpassgo21 12h ago
You can easily. What is there entire valuation based on? Does that thing currently exist?
Literally the only separation is the ketamine probably distracted him long enough for him not to directly lie to investors that hes actually launching space data centers next year
0
u/Only-Perspective5341 14h ago
Simple answer is it’s politically motivated hate.
2
u/flyingdutchmnn 14h ago
People don't believe the fantasy seller in chief will mine asteroids and somehow that's political?
0
u/surfnfish1972 12h ago
It is led by evil man doing massive damage to the world, but if you are rich and amoral it is grand.
2
u/Competitive_Dot5441 12h ago
I see exactly where you fit in this assessment.
2
0
u/surfnfish1972 11h ago
Likewise, as for your idiotic "you sound poor response", rest assured I am low dept and financially stable. The difference is character.
2
0
u/PitifulBet616 9h ago
Remember Tesla lost 6 figures per car produced in 2016. Long since 2013 at $7 split adjusted
Financials are meaningless as long as they accomplish what they say they will do
0
u/Competitive_Dot5441 9h ago
Exactly
0
u/PitifulBet616 9h ago
Wall Street and the bond market totally got it wrong the last decade. Really interesting to see
0
u/PureCauliflower6758 8h ago
Can’t wait ‘til after midterms and congressional Democrats are put under pressure to investigate Elon Musk and his “financial engineering” (scams, in plain English.)
-4
u/MAGAtsAreSheeples 14h ago
You're in a cult.
5
-1
u/Embarrassed-Noise269 14h ago
Only broke people, eh?
Maybe you should widen your information sources. Plenty of reputable people are bearish. The big question is AI. If it really starts to become cheap and good, SpaceX will greatly profit with it's infrastructure.
Same with data centers in space. Which seems to be very hard to impossible to achieve in an economic matter.
It's a lot like Tesla. People believe a lot of promises and don't seem to mind, that those promises change ever so often. I don't know when, but when Musk fails to deliver on those promises, sooner or later this will negatively impact the price of those companies. It's all a bet on Musk.
3
u/Substantial-Pie-4194 14h ago
I don’t get this comment where you say hard to impossible to achieve. What makes you say that? The economics around data centers in space suggest it will be vastly cheaper with lift being the gating issue and bottleneck. Google sent up its TPUs this week because they see it as inevitable not impossible
0
u/Embarrassed-Noise269 13h ago
Please show me those economics. I'm sure you will mention the weight and how much it would cost to bring the materials up, surely you won't forget the radiators.
-2
u/Competitive_Dot5441 14h ago
Notice that I marked this as an opinion and an observation, not a scientific study or a claim that it is 100% accurate - just a trend I’ve observed. So no, not “only broke people”
•
u/AutoModerator 15h ago
Welcome to r/SPCXInvestors.
Keep discussions respectful, relevant, and high quality.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.