SpaceX IPO as early as June 12

[junkanoo]

Thanks for the interesting article. It reinforces the idea of not doing FOMO.

I am now thinking of what to do with my BPTRX shares post IPO. Maybe try to sell into the initial bounce and use the money to buy SPCX later if the price drops. One complication is BPTRX has a sizable TSLA portion which will cancel some of the SPCX pop.

We're in the same boat. Which just became more leaky as SpaceX is going for a flat valuation of $1.75 Trillion (with today's change in their S-1 filing).

Why? Because stupid money in the market is good for me. And a bunch of retail investors bumping up the IPO to 2 Trillion with their beyond stupid market orders, may not be off the table, but certainly reduced.

While this is not so good for me ... it is good for the overall market as the scope of SpaceX cratering badly down-the-line is now diminished. The right move by SpaceX as it supports those in the stock for the long haul.

So, do I take my $1K profit now for being in BPTRX for a couple of weeks at most, hedge my bets with taking some off the table or just wait to see how this plays out?

 

[Route246]

In the words of an anonymous wise investor, "I wouldn't buy that stock with your money!"

I look at fundamentals. This stock has no path to profitability and it doesn't even claim to have one. pets.com, webvan, exodus ring any bells?

 

[scotti]

The other thread seems to contain some of the sentiments I wanted to share.

Speaking strictly as an investor, this is a no brainer. No fundamentals, no thank you.
Speaking as a hypothetical Wall Street Bets gambler, there is money to be made here.
Speaking as an American who cares about technology, it's muddy:

• SpaceX has genuinely revolutionized access to space for smaller companies. There is an entire industry that would not exist if not for the Rideshare program (which is currently on hold, as SpaceX figures out how to phase in Starship)
• SpaceX has genuinely taken over responsibility for the US defense industry's access to space. ULA is barely an "also ran"
• SpaceX has in Starlink a business unit with excellent recurring revenue prospects from the everyman, not from Uncle Sam, but the CapEx required to get it there is inconceivable, and that has historically not worked out well (Motorola Iridium before the sale to Colussy, anyone?)
• SpaceX has a CEO who is unpredictable
• For this IPO, the CEO of SpaceX has tied the core financials up with other businesses that have their own mix of exciting prospects and massive investments required

If this was truly a SpaceX IPO, then it would be like buying Boeing stock - there can be bad years, but not bad decades. Since it's not, then I believe it is better suited to gambling accounts than investing accounts.

My opinion only, not financial advice, etc etc.

 

[Freefaller21]

Hi,
at a price of over $500 per share, the barrier to entry for retail investors would have been psychologically very high. By splitting the stock, the visual price is brought down to a much more accessible price. They want to catch the momentum and keep the sentiment very high. The whole finance world is talking about it and they are proud of it. The IPO filings show that SpaceX is aiming to raise roughly $75 billion. Thats huge!

 

[SteveTX]

You can now sign up on Fidelity for the SpaceX IPO at $135 per share, fixed price offering.

 

[Fermion]

In the words of an anonymous wise investor, "I wouldn't buy that stock with your money!"

I look at fundamentals. This stock has no path to profitability and it doesn't even claim to have one. pets.com, webvan, exodus ring any bells?

SpaceX had plenty of path to profitability with Starlink before Elon made them buy into AI.

 

[Cassius King]

I'll grab my popcorn and enjoy this IPO from the sidelines.

 

[frayne]

For me it's purely a long term speculation play. Hard to bet against Musk and his teams.

 

[audreyh1]

Interesting, so S&P500 is going to hold off until they become profitable, but total market index will have it. Kind of the opposite of how things usually work in that total market index is usually minimally impacted when companies are added or removed from the S&P500 because they don’t experience forced buys on high market capitalization companies.

We haven’t bought at IPO in decades.

 

[TrvlBug]

Can't resist. DH and I are going to purchase 100 shares in my Roth.

 

[MichaelB]

Interesting, so S&P500 is going to hold off until they become profitable, but total market index will have it. Kind of the opposite of how things usually work in that total market index is usually minimally impacted when companies are added or removed from the S&P500 because they don’t experience forced buys on high market capitalization companies.

We haven’t bought at IPO in decades.

S&P500 holding off is the way it should be. They have a set of conditions that SpaceX isn’t close to meeting.

The FTSE / Russel went out of their way to accommodate SpaceX. The lobbying must have been strong but effective.

 

[audreyh1]

S&P500 holding off is the way it should be. They have a set of conditions that SpaceX isn’t close to meeting.

The FTSE / Russel went out of their way to accommodate SpaceX. The lobbying must have been strong but effective.

At least I found this for total market index:

CRSP US Total Market Index (Vanguard Total Stock Market): Total market indexes weight companies based on their free-float market capitalization. Because SpaceX is only floating a small fraction ($75 billion) of its overall $1.75 trillion valuation, it will enter these indexes but initially account for a tiny fraction of the fund (e.g., roughly a 0.12% weight).

But it’s supposed to be added 5 days after IPO - the new “fast track”. Nasdaq-100 I think it’s 15 days.

 

[copyright1997reloaded]

I've put preliminary interest orders in at both Fidelity and Schwab for this thing. Nothing huge, 200 shares at Fido and 100 at Schwab (so far). I am still on the fence as to whether I actually want to participate. Over the years, I have had minimal participation in IPO's. The last one I can remember doing was Facebook, which ironically I ended up selling at a loss. Ugh. (Hard to imagine being one of the people who actually lost money on Facebook. Since I am confessing, I also managed to lose money long ago on Netflix. . The good news is that I did better on Apple, Edwards Life Sciences, MicroSoft, Linear Technology/Analog Devices, Marriott, and some things. Thus FI(RE).

I do think SpaceX is kicking butt in terms of where they are vs. competitors, including StarlLink. Yes, the valuation is suspect in terms of 1.75 trillion valuation. As are many others these days.

I also am a bit worried that this IPO will mark the peak. (More reasons that I might pull my participation.). I guess I will decide over the weekend.

 

[almost there]

Takes me back to 1999. Would expect a silly pop to $250+ a share on the 12th.
Then up and down till Sep. / Oct. . for the low of the year. Then settle around the IPO price. Its a good one to put in a Roth and forget about at $135. (If you can get it)
I put in for some at Schwab. But dont have my hopes up. Have gotten several IPO's way back when. But never the ones I really wanted. LOL LOL
Should be fun to watch regardless. What gets sold to enter etc.
Might also be marking the markets peak. As its a great time to launch an IPO.

 

[audreyh1]

DH thinks Tesla will be merged into SpaceX at some point FWIW.

 

[RetiredHappy]

DH thinks Tesla will be merged into SpaceX at some point FWIW.

I bought a few stocks of Tesla at $133, about $4K worth of it and it is now at above $12K. I bought it when I had $4K of cash in the account and used it to buy "something". I figure if Tesla gets merged into SpaceX, by default I will own a few stocks of SpaceX.

 

[junkanoo]

S&P500 holding off is the way it should be. They have a set of conditions that SpaceX isn’t close to meeting.

The FTSE / Russel went out of their way to accommodate SpaceX. The lobbying must have been strong but effective.

I don't think lobbying had anything to do with it. FTSE makes money on the use of their indexes. So, while I see what the S&P 500 is doing is a selling point, others will see it differently. And when you're a smaller player, being different might be the right move for them.

 

[Qs Laptop]

SpaceX has miniscule revenues. They are showing massive losses.

SpaceX plans on putting thousands of data centers in Earth orbit where there is abundant sunshine for solar power and no need to chill or cool the components.

What could go wrong? How easy will it be to do maintenance and repairs on these data centers?

Think of how long it will take to implement this plan. Think of how long it will take for them to be profitable.

But go ahead and invest in SpaceX. The ground floor investors from the years leading up to the IPO will thank you as they sell off their shares, breathe a sigh of relief, cash in on your fresh money, and retire early.

 

[ncbill]

SpaceX has miniscule revenues. They are showing massive losses.

SpaceX plans on putting thousands of data centers in Earth orbit where there is abundant sunshine for solar power and no need to chill or cool the components.

What could go wrong? How easy will it be to do maintenance and repairs on these data centers?

Think of how long it will take to implement this plan. Think of how long it will take for them to be profitable.

But go ahead and invest in SpaceX. The ground floor investors from the years leading up to the IPO will thank you as they sell off their shares, breathe a sigh of relief, cash in on your fresh money, and retire early.

In space no one can hear your bit flip

"In space, high-energy ionizing particles exist as part of the natural background, referred to as galactic cosmic rays (GCRs).

Solar particle events and high-energy protons trapped in the Earth's magnetosphere (Van Allen radiation belts) exacerbate this problem.

The high energies associated with the phenomenon in the space particle environment generally render increased spacecraft shielding useless in terms of eliminating SEUs and catastrophic single-event phenomena (e.g. destructive latch-up)."

 

[audreyh1]

How are all those existing satellites working OK then?

 

[Fishmasterdan]

SpaceX IPO explained | FAQs about SpaceX's IPO | Fidelity

Curious about the SpaceX IPO? Here's everything you need to know to participate and invest in in SpaceX's IPO.

www.fidelity.com

Fidelity just announced you only need 2k in your account to apply for IPO shares FYI.

 

[Qs Laptop]

How are all those existing satellites working OK then?

Are they all working OK?

How do you know if they are?

 

[Route246]

SpaceX has miniscule revenues. They are showing massive losses.

SpaceX plans on putting thousands of data centers in Earth orbit where there is abundant sunshine for solar power and no need to chill or cool the components.

What could go wrong? How easy will it be to do maintenance and repairs on these data centers?

Think of how long it will take to implement this plan. Think of how long it will take for them to be profitable.

But go ahead and invest in SpaceX. The ground floor investors from the years leading up to the IPO will thank you as they sell off their shares, breathe a sigh of relief, cash in on your fresh money, and retire early.

What could go wrong? I've spent a lot of time in data centers in 45 years and the one thing that happens is you always need either a team to fix/remediate/reset/replace extremely heavy (servers weighing hundreds of pounds) servers and networking gear. Additionally, during this time there will be continuous needs for "smart hands" where a human has to go and perform routine tasks, sometimes as simple as a physical reset of a cable connection. These server cabinets (racks) are loaded with cheap commodity parts that tend to have routine issues. These are not rad-hard space-qualified parts. There is often no fail-safe, fail-over hardware configurations, that function is usually handled in the software layer.

I call BS on data centers in space. Although they can probably get unlimited power from solar I just can't see a way to get that much tonnage up in space. Data centers have loading docks where big trailers unload extremely high density (i.e. heavy) hardware. They use fork lifts, pallet jacks and server lifts to get everything into place. I don't think there exists any technology now to get that sort of payload into space. Has anyone ever questioned this nonsense?

 

[shrdlu]

What could go wrong? I've spent a lot of time in data centers in 45 years and the one thing that happens is you always need either a team to fix/remediate/reset/replace extremely heavy (servers weighing hundreds of pounds) servers and networking gear. Additionally, during this time there will be continuous needs for "smart hands" where a human has to go and perform routine tasks, sometimes as simple as a physical reset of a cable connection. These server cabinets (racks) are loaded with cheap commodity parts that tend to have routine issues. These are not rad-hard space-qualified parts. There is often no fail-safe, fail-over hardware configurations, that function is usually handled in the software layer.

I call BS on data centers in space. Although they can probably get unlimited power from solar I just can't see a way to get that much tonnage up in space. Data centers have loading docks where big trailers unload extremely high density (i.e. heavy) hardware. They use fork lifts, pallet jacks and server lifts to get everything into place. I don't think there exists any technology now to get that sort of payload into space. Has anyone ever questioned this nonsense?

I'm no expert on satellites, but, imagine a single rack w/ solar, heat sinks, thrusters and laser links (like Starlink) for inter-rack communication.

Napkin:

How much would that weigh? 1 tonne, 2? Starship is big. ~150 tonnes to LEO when fully reusable (I'm assuming SpaceX gets there). So, let's say 100 racks / launch. Original xAI Colossus DC with 100,000 GPUs from what I can find was 1500-2500 racks. So, 15-25 launches for what was the largest AI cluster (I think) at one point. SpaceX launched Falcon 9 165 times last year. Assuming things go well I don't think mass will be the problem. That's kind of the point of Starship.

In regards to hands on / remote hands maintenance, I assume one just doesn't do it. If a rack becomes sufficiently degraded or fails entirely deorbit it and let it burn up. Launch another one.

Whether the economics of this works out I don't think anybody really knows yet, but it certainly feels that it will be technically possible soon.

 

[tulak]

I wonder how much compute you can piggyback to existing Starlink satellites?

SpaceX made reusable rockets common, something they were mocked for early on because it was considered impossible. And they came really close to failing.

Eventually, all industries will be moved to space, assuming the human race doesn’t go off the rails. Why pollute the planet when we have cheap and easy access to space? And imagine what happens when we can successfully mine asteroids. Earth can become a park.

The only question is when will it happen. Maybe in our lifetime, maybe not, but at this point, SpaceX is will likely be the forerunner and will probably be the critical player for infrastructure. Much like Tesla superchargers have become the de facto standard for EV cars.

As for SpaceX being a good investment, the general outlook on the fundamentals is not great. They need and will burn through a lot of cash. I’m also not convinced they care about shareholder value. But I’ll still buy some shares at IPO, if I get an allocation.

I’m happy that we still have companies that are willing to innovate.