pera 2 days ago
-16.5% at the moment... Is the market reacting to the $20B bond offering news?

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2026-06-22/spacex-ki...

budman1 2 days ago
so, are these bonds a good buy?
cdrnsf 2 days ago
A rapid unscheduled financial disassembly.
drivingmenuts 2 days ago
If my schadenfreude grows anymore, I might burst into tears.
lucamark 2 days ago
Let's grab some popcorn.

- Price/Sales about 128x (NVIDIA had a peak of a 40x at its peak)

- Bought Twitter per 44 billions. Inflated its valuation to $250 billion just by integrating it into X.AI

- EnterpriseValue/EBITDA about 219x (30x for scaleup business) and negative Price-to-Earnings

- Low free-float trick (minimal public shares available)

Even the market efficiency hypothesis struggles to justify it

redox99 2 days ago
If the Anthropic, Google, and Reflection AI deals stay afloat, the numbers are much better.
tcp_handshaker 2 days ago
Spare a thought for the investors who bought SPCX at $218 on the 16 June at 10:00AM...They REALLY needed that stock....
lucamark 2 days ago
That's bad for ETF owners too. Funds will be legally forced to buy a tightly restricted supply that will pump the price even more
tim333 2 days ago
Still above the actual IPO price of 135.

It's below where it opened trading on the first day which I guess is what the editorialised headline is supposed to mean. Trading opened at about 160 on the 12th and is about 155 now. Such fluctuations don't really mean much.

manwithopinions 2 days ago
First trade was exactly $150. The indicated price was falling from around $170 and then when it hit $150 the market opened.
stackbutterflow 2 days ago
Not convinced it means anything in one way or another.

I remember the same headlines right after Facebook's IPO. The discourse was very much that it was obvious that a website to connect with your friends wouldn't make money.

2OEH8eoCRo0 2 days ago
Facebook was profitable
rlt 2 days ago
What's your point? If people were skeptical of Facebook even if it was profitable then it reinforces the grandparent comment's point.
ralfd 2 days ago
SpaceX is too with the Anthropic/Google deal
orwin 2 days ago
Not is: might be.
ralfd 2 days ago
SpaceX will swing wildly in future, also exploding/successful Starship flights and enthusiasm for moon landing/Artemis missions.
bryanlarsen 2 days ago
Which is true, but silly. SpaceX's rocket business is currently a $4B/year business. SpaceX's $2T valuation has nothing to do with launching rockets, a little bit to do with being an ISP and a lot to do with AI hype.
bigtex 2 days ago
Yes, they claim the TAM for AI is 24 trillion dollars. Do with that what you will.
rlt 2 days ago
The $2T valuation definitely depends on Starship working well. Orbital data centers have no chance of being profitable otherwise.
manwithopinions 2 days ago
The $2T doesn’t depend on anything to do with space. People are investing in Elon, not any specific product or technology. Hence his roll up of X and Xai into SpaceX and Tesla soon too. SpaceX is The Elon Company, not space or cars or AI.

And anyway, orbital data centers have no chance. They’re just like the Mars colony, an Elon boondoggle.

verzali 19 hours ago
Feels like a bad bet. People are not immortal. What happens if he gets hit by a bus or has a heart attack?
illiac786 14 hours ago
It’s emotional, people like to have someone to believe in, who turns off their brains a bit. So annoying these pesky brains, always whispering rational things to do. So much more comfortable to just blindly trust into someone.

Funny how the above absolutely does not apply at the local scale. The same people blindly trusting Elon probably don’t trust their neighbors to even hold a parcel for them.

rlt 2 days ago
If the price moves down when a Starship test flight doesn't achieve all objectives that's probably a good opportunity to buy. Many people think "rocket go boom, must be bad" but to some extent it's expected during the development phase. They get more useful data about where the limits are when it doesn't work.

Of course there's limits to that, but SpaceX has a lot of cash to absorb failures, unlike in the early days.

raincom 2 days ago
At least people stop shorting SpaceX on fundamentals. Shorting just increases the momentum.
elzbardico 2 days ago
QUOD ERAT DEMONSTRANDUM
contingencies 2 days ago
AD TERRAM!
drivingmenuts 2 days ago
YOU MUST CONSTRUCT ADDITIONAL PYLONS!
contingencies 2 days ago
It certainly wasn't a StarCraft or gaming reference, though I'm not surprised it was interpreted that way (personally bowed out of RTS ~C&C1). I do think you've got a good millennial-cultural catch-phrase for the zeitgeist AI datacenter funk there, though!
drivingmenuts 2 days ago
I wish I could train Claude to end every statement it utters with "YOU MUST CONSTRUCT ADDITION PYLONS".

And have it be permanently embedded.

empath75 2 days ago
The IPO price for SpaceX was _delusional_. The price now is delusional. Especially since it's so dependent on the US government for revenue and he's done everything possible to irritate the party that's about to take over the federal budget.
tombert 2 days ago
It was insane to me that a company that had less than thirty-billion in revenue was valued at more than a trillion. I'm not sure how the People in Charge didn't call bullshit.
cyberge99 2 days ago
There are no people in charge.
ifwinterco 2 days ago
The way exponential maths works, if a company really can grow at (for example) 10% per annum then it can grow into what looks initially like a very high PE multiple on current earnings surprisingly quickly.

This is why people sometimes use forward P/E but that does have the obvious drawback of the denominator not actually existing yet.

However with SpaceX the valuation is extreme and also can they grow at that rate for years on end? Potentially not

tombert 13 hours ago
Reading their IPO prospectus seemed to imply that they planned on getting 100% of the entire AI market.

Considering how far behind Grok is (revenue-wise, but also quality-wise [1]), that seems very unlikely to me, and while this might be overly optimistic I think there's a chance that with SpaceX being public, Elon's drug addiction and pathological lying might catch up with him.

[1] Disclaimer, I've only used the free version of Grok. Maybe the paid one is great but I doubt it's better than Claude or OpenAI and I don't want to give Elon money since he seems to have done a pretty good job buying the executive branch with it.

mrcwinn 2 days ago
For the sake of clarity, it's well above its historic IPO price, but near or slightly below where it began trading that day once it officially opened.
jeremywho 2 days ago
Historic IPO price? It opened at $160 10 days ago, did it not? Currently it is below that price. What historic price are you referring to?
kriz9 2 days ago
IPO price was $135
tcp_handshaker 2 days ago
Wait for tomorrow...
lousken 2 days ago
why would you even invest into this bubble
budman1 2 days ago
because i am smarter than the next guy and will know when to get out.
general1465 2 days ago
Last words before posting loss porn on r/wsb
cyberge99 2 days ago
Marketing and promotion.
josefritzishere 2 days ago
I think it was completely obvious from the outset that this was a pump and dump scam. I'm waiting for the insider trading charges to hit.
rlt 2 days ago
No insiders have been able to sell yet, and won't for another couple months.

Elon and some major early investors are locked up for a whole year.

budman1 2 days ago
US doesn't enforce laws concerning financial crimes anymore. Or laws on milk purity, either.
OnlyANeurosci 2 days ago
pump and dump scheme, but your 401k bought some.
ttcbj 2 days ago
One thing I learned recently is that Vanguard Total Stock Market Index (VTI) is float-weighted. That means that SpaceX's percentage in the index is based on the value of the floating shares, not the total market cap. As a result, a fund like VTI, for now, doesn't have that much SpaceX. It will add more as the lockup periods expire and the float increases, but increasing float might also drive down the price.
neogodless 2 days ago
Looks like the holdings update at the end of each month. Check back in ~8 days and look for SPCX!

https://advisors.vanguard.com/investments/products/vti/vangu... (there's a search by ticker under Holdings)

jerjerjer 2 days ago
They didn't even start on the dump part yet. Only initial 5% of the shares are trading so far.
netsharc 2 days ago
Do 401k's know about pump-and-dump, but think they can time it to make profit? Or are 401ks "bound" to buy stocks?

It feels like a lot of retail buyers know the emperor is naked, but are still acting on greed, thinking they can "catch the falling knife" and time the market departure to profit from the hype...

tombert 2 days ago
I think it's much simpler. A lot of funds are tied to things like the NASDAQ-100, which SpaceX figured out how to get fast-tracked for. Once it's officially on the NASDAQ-100, stuff like QQQ has to buy it, whether or not people like the idea of it.

Of course active investors could do something like short Space X by exactly the amount that their funds have to more or less "cancel out" their investment, but most people aren't active investors.

smw 2 days ago
A lot of them are heavily invested in index funds that added SpaceX at IPO due to market cap.
wrs 2 days ago
The big indexes have a cooldown period before buying, which these scam artists attempted to radically shorten before the IPO, but they failed (at least partially). The S&P500, for example, will delay a year before adding it to the index. Nasdaq 100 was talked into reducing it to 15 days, so you might want to get out of the Nasdaq 100.
tombert 2 days ago
I got rid of all my QQQ, which was substantial, but I didn't convert all my vulnerable portfolio because I wanted to minimize how much I pay in taxes.

I now use the Interactive Brokers MCP to make a "pseudo QQQ" which has all companies except Tesla and SpaceX in there, and I otherwise use the same weights as the official QQQ. In order to avoid tax overhead, my rebalancing is buy-only, no selling, so it's not a perfect analog to QQQ but it's close enough and I at least got some of my capital out of SpaceX.

0cf8612b2e1e 2 days ago
S&P still requires one year(?) profitability, which SpaceX has yet to achieve. The recent datacenter rentals might have pushed it into a profitable quarter.
cyberge99 2 days ago
They can solve that with “creative accounting”.
SpicyLemonZest 2 days ago
Notably, today was the first batch of additions, which really does lend credence to the idea that it's just about people getting out after the forced buying. We'll see what happens in early July when it makes it into the Nasdaq 100.
rlt 2 days ago
What's that theory? Who are the "people getting out after the forced buying"? People who bought assuming there would be an increase in price due to forced buying?
SpicyLemonZest 2 days ago
Right. As the "short squeeze" dramas have shown, pump and dump victims these days can have a surprising amount of literacy on market dynamics. I would guess there's quite a lot of SpaceX investors who were convinced that the stock can't go down because the indexes have to buy it.
r721 2 days ago
ralfd 2 days ago
Context?
r721 2 days ago
Just a thing I noticed in a sidebar when I opened the link.