SpaceX potential IPO

[meekGee]

I think the reason SpaceX hasn't gone public with stock is they are waiting for Starship to be completely successful.  Successful launch and landing of boosters as well as launch, orbit, deploy Starlink Satellites, and land back at the launch pad.  Once this is done for several launches, it will IPO. 

Then as their Mega Bays in Texas and Florida start cranking out rockets the fun begins.  Orbital refueling, flights to the moon and Mars, 42,000 Starlinks deployed, market domination of launches, Starlink growth, xAI servers in space, the list can be endless. 

The only real competition I see is from Blue Origin with New Glenn.  IF and WHEN Blue builds 9x4 and maybe a reusable upper stage as Project Jarvis, and maybe a 3rd stage based on BE-7, they will get a lot of government launches.  And, if they complete Project LEO for an income stream.  They move slow, but they have a money stream from Bezos and Amazon.  All the other small companies with smaller rockets will be scrambling over a few government launches and small sats that Falcon 9 has been getting.  If SpaceX keeps Falcon 9 going the next 5 years with contracted government launches, other smaller companies will be hard pressed for business.  In 5 years, Vulcan may be gone as well as a few of the smaller companies will be gone or bought out by SpaceX and Blue Origin.

When "the fun begins" as you describe it, NG won't amount to a hill of beans either, even with 9x4 and Jarvis.  It won't have 1% of the launch capacity, not even close. (Even with government contracts)

[thespacecow]

EV/Revenue = 30 time (15 billion revenue), is 450 billion.

For Rocket Lab, this ratio is currently 70.

Why should SpaceX accept a P/S ratio significantly lower than Rocket Lab when they're light years ahead of Rocket Lab?

And what do you think of the valuation of RL, to be acceptable price, or overvalue?

RKLB is extremely overvalued as I said many times before, but that doesn't answer my question.

You agreed that RKLB is overvalued, but you also said in the Neutron thread that it's a good thing RL has enough cash now - cash they raised on the top of the very high valuation - to weather Neutron delay. So if RL got cash at high valuation is a good thing, why isn't SpaceX getting cash at high valuation a good thing as well, especially given SpaceX is much more deserving of the high valuation than RL?

As investors we are, we can said both things:

RKLB is Overvalue NOW.

SpaceX is and will be overavalue at 1,5 trillion market valuation, when IPO.

Both phrases, can be true.

Even if we accept your premise which is "SpaceX is and will be overavalue at 1,5 trillion market valuation, when IPO.", that still doesn't answer my original question, which is: Why should SpaceX accept a P/S ratio significantly lower than Rocket Lab when they're light years ahead of Rocket Lab?

It also doesn't answer my new question: Why do you consider RL got cash at overvalued valuation as a good thing, but SpaceX get cash at - according to you - overvalued valuation as a bad thing?

[catdlr]

Moderation:

The discussion regarding Elon Musk's remark about the 10K ships has misaligned this thread. All posts from that discussion have been moved to their own dedicated thread.

SpaceX/Elon Making 10,000 Starships a Year?

All continuing discussions on that should be posted there. Let's keep discussing the Potential SpaceX IPO here.

Tony

[thespacecow]

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/musk-spacex-lines-banks-lead-162633993.html

SpaceX has lined up four banks to lead its initial public offering, according to people familiar with the matter, as Elon Musk’s rocket and satellite firm moves forward with plans for the biggest-ever listing.

The company sees Bank of America Corp., Goldman Sachs Group Inc., JPMorgan Chase & Co. and Morgan Stanley in senior roles, the people said, asking not to be identified as the information isn’t public.

The Financial Times reported the lead banks earlier. Additional banks are in talks for roles on SpaceX’s IPO, the people said. No final decisions have been made and details could change, the people said.

[phantomdj]

https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/companies/spacex-targets-june-ipo-at-1-5t-valuation-report/ar-AA1V8HJp

Elon Musk's SpaceX is looking at a mid-June 2026 IPO, aiming to raise as much as $50B at a valuation of roughly $1.5T, the Financial Times reported, citing people familiar with the matter.

Musk has proposed the timing align with a rare planetary conjunction of Jupiter and Venus on June 8-9, while another reason to target that month is his birthday on June 28, the people said.

[RedLineTrain]

I'm becoming more convinced that SpaceX will take whatever they can get in the IPO and invest it in a Terafab joint venture with Tesla and perhaps additional spectrum for D2D.  That number will jump around constantly between now and IPO.

[thespacecow]

I'm becoming more convinced that SpaceX will take whatever they can get in the IPO and invest it in a Terafab joint venture with Tesla and perhaps additional spectrum for D2D.  That number will jump around constantly between now and IPO.

They'll need to plan the # of shares to sell and price range with their bankers and eventually specify it in SEC filing, and they need to make a decision relatively soon given June IPO is a fairly aggressive timeline, so I wouldn't expect it to keep jumping.

$50B is not a lot given their ambitions, I was hoping it'd be ~$100B.

[spacenut]

There is another discussion about Xai in space.  Someone showed a patent that SpaceX received for cooling the server or motherboard on the satellites.  The solar panels face the sun and the back side of the flat satellite has a built in grid for cooling.  They said 12.5 or so watts/kg vs 3 watts per kg for a Boeing satellite. 

So yeah, SpaceX will have to launch a lot of Xai satellites with Starship.  They will need a lot of launches, not just for Xai, but also Starlink will be incorporated in with Xai.  Then there will have to be a lot of launches to transfer fuel to fuel depots for outgoing Starships.  So most launches will be for making a business case and making money while outgoing launches paid for by Starlink and Xai profits to have thousands of launches a year.  How many, who knows?  But it seems like Starships will be extremely busy.  NASA will pay for moon launches, and I would presume initial Mars launches to have a say in what will be done on Mars.  Otherwise it will be all SpaceX for Mars. 

I predict when Starship is fully operational, SLS will go away and NASA will just hitch rides with SpaceX rockets like they do with Dragon now.  Money will come in to SpaceX from NASA for moon and Mars rides.  SpaceX will need a lot of launch facilities to do all this.  Thus the IPO to bring in private money with Musk in control.   

[RedLineTrain]

I'm becoming more convinced that SpaceX will take whatever they can get in the IPO and invest it in a Terafab joint venture with Tesla and perhaps additional spectrum for D2D.  That number will jump around constantly between now and IPO.

They'll need to plan the # of shares to sell and price range with their bankers and eventually specify it in SEC filing, and they need to make a decision relatively soon given June IPO is a fairly aggressive timeline, so I wouldn't expect it to keep jumping.

$50B is not a lot given their ambitions, I was hoping it'd be ~$100B.

They will specify at the very last minute based on perceived demand at the moment.  The S-1 registration statements are draft and have placeholders, and can be and usually are revised one or more times before the day of IPO.  It will depend on the mood of the day and how juicy are SpaceX's reported financials.

$100 billion is a huge amount of liquidity.  The American capital markets are very deep, but I wonder if they are that deep.  That said, I understand that this is the range that OpenAI is talking.

[DanClemmensen]

I predict when Starship is fully operational, SLS will go away and NASA will just hitch rides with SpaceX rockets like they do with Dragon now.  Money will come in to SpaceX from NASA for moon and Mars rides.  SpaceX will need a lot of launch facilities to do all this.  Thus the IPO to bring in private money with Musk in control.

How big is this NASA market? NASA pays SpaceX less than $300 M for Crew Dragon flights, or < $600 M/yr, and I think less than that for Cargo Dragon. The HLS mission for Artemis IV was $1.13 B and that included some development money. NASA's total annual budget is about $25 B/yr.

[Tywin]

Very wrong move:

https://www.reuters.com/world/musks-spacex-merger-talks-with-xai-ahead-planned-ipo-source-says-2026-01-29/

The same with Tesla dead EV...

[RedLineTrain]

Even though this has some pros and cons, it seems to be a natural consequence of AI data centers in space being a thing.

Note that the xAI ground computing infrastructure team already shares some personnel with SpaceX.

[sstli2]

AI data centers in space being a thing.

It should not be glossed over that they are NOT a thing at present. Just that they may become a thing.

[spacenut]

Tywin, Tesla is doing very well.  1,629,129 vehicles delivered plus 46.7 Gwh energy storage for power grids.  They are also shifting to Optimus robot production.  Diversification hasn't hurt Tesla and will help in the long run.  Oh, Tesla makes several model vehicles.  Model S, X, Y, and 3 as well as Cybertruck and large Tractor-Trailer trucks that Pepsi is buying and using.  So they are bringing in money. 

As far as Mars, the Tractor-Trailer size truck will probably be used as the basis of Mars modular equipment.  Travelers for crew, front end loaders, backhoes, even cranes.  Thus the electric vehicle company Musk needed because Mars doesn't have gas stations so all equipment will have to be electric. 

SpaceX is primarily focused for future Mars transporting.  Starlink and xAI will bring in the money.  Starlink is now all over the world except in certain primarily socialist countries that control what people can receive.  It is on planes, ships, even in the backwoods and remote areas.  It makes quite a bit of money for SpaceX.  NASA and Space Force launches are just gravy for the meat that Starlink brings in.  Launch services will be far cheaper for NASA in a few years without SLS thus allowing NASA more money for other things, even with a smaller budget. 

[PM3]

Very wrong move:

https://www.reuters.com/world/musks-spacex-merger-talks-with-xai-ahead-planned-ipo-source-says-2026-01-29/

The same with Tesla dead EV...

Yep. xAI is a monstrous cash burner, so this is a setback for getting to Mars and making life multiplanetary, which will need huge investments.

[StraumliBlight]

Oh, Tesla makes several model vehicles.  Model S, X, Y, and 3 as well as Cybertruck and large Tractor-Trailer trucks that Pepsi is buying and using.  So they are bringing in money.

Model X and Model S got cancelled yesterday.

[Vultur]

AI data centers in space being a thing.

It should not be glossed over that they are NOT a thing at present. Just that they may become a thing.

Yeah. It is far from a given that the market for data centers will continue to be so explosive. Current LLM - AI use is massively subsidized by investment capital, it's far from clear how much demand will exist once something like real costs have to be charged to users.

And even given that it does continue, space data centers making sense requires several other assumptions not yet demonstrated. Not necessarily unreasonable assumptions, but not certain ones either.

I think there's a very real risk of SpaceX getting too tied to a massive bubble.

[RedLineTrain]

I can see why they would pair xAI with SpaceX.  Looking down the road a couple of years, SpaceX is expecting to be able to provide an immense amount of launch capacity.  And in the meantime, they need to do something useful with their cash.  So launch infrastructure, xAI, and Terafab (logic, memory, packaging, and solar, in JV with Tesla).

The big investment demands for Mars are either the same as for orbital AI or mostly medium term.  Like 10 years from now.  They probably will not conflict too much.

It does seem like a bit of a side quest, but is Starlink also a side quest?

[meekGee]

I can see why they would pair xAI with SpaceX.  Looking down the road a couple of years, SpaceX is expecting to be able to provide an immense amount of launch capacity.  And in the meantime, they need to do something useful with their cash.  So launch infrastructure, xAI, and Terafab (logic, memory, packaging, and solar, in JV with Tesla).

The big investment demands for Mars are either the same as for orbital AI or mostly medium term.  Like 10 years from now.  They probably will not conflict too much.

It does seem like a bit of a side quest, but is Starlink also a side quest?

Yup if the technology and business models work, it's a no-brainer.  If you don't believe any of them (Mars, AI, EVs, etc) then nothing will make sense to you.

Me, I can't imagine life without constant access to chatG, and I know a lot of people that make similar use of it.  Some people don't get it, some do.  At any rate, we all pay for it.

I think what's coming is not just "better chats" but much more capable, "persistent" chats. It's going to run against which percent of the population adopts it quickly and which doesn't.

I'm old enough to remember when the Internet was a fad. When Wikipedia was an odd experiment.  All the failed attempts at smart phones / PDAs.  I have zero doubt that it'll work, and i got around to seeing why orbital AI is a good idea.

[meekGee]

Very wrong move:

https://www.reuters.com/world/musks-spacex-merger-talks-with-xai-ahead-planned-ipo-source-says-2026-01-29/

The same with Tesla dead EV...

Tywin, I drive a Tesla...  I never want to go in a gas station again, breath the fumes, get gasoline and other shit on my hands.  I fill up at home for a fraction of the cost, and regenerative braking is so satisfying.  Why would I ever go back to gas cars?