[mawadev]

I have no crystal ball, but I feel uneasy when they change basic rules about indizes right before these IPOs. There are a lot of retirements on the line just by this fact. Maybe big tech gambled too close to the sun and found a way out? Whether something pops or not, it leaves a bad taste in my mouth this can be done so easily, don't you think?

[jmuguy]

This is it entirely. I don't really care if the pessimists or optimists or somewhere in between ends up being correct. What possible reason is there to change the rules around the indexes unless these companies and their backers know that time in the market is going to expose that they're overvalued and they want to force someone else to be holding the bag when that happens.

[kryogen1c]

Is it possible SpaceX is not massively overvalued and delaying its index approval unnecessarily slows its economic output by needlessly restricting its access to funding, harming us all collectively?

[wrsh07]

> There are a lot of retirements on the line just by this fact

1) I would expect anyone close to retirement to have a fairly balanced portfolio.

2) if they don't include SpaceX and the stock does >10x in the next year, they'll end up doing terribly on the benchmarks. SpaceX is big, but if they invest early, it won't be a ridiculous % of the portfolio. Even if one overpays by 2x, since it's under .1% of the total portfolio. If it went to zero nobody would lose their shirts, they'd lose <.1% of their portfolio.

[JohnMakin]

Am I misreading 2) or are you saying you think there’s a reasonable chance spaceX market cap could become 10+ trillion in the next year?

[wrsh07]

i'm not saying they will justify that market cap, but Tesla always hit market cap numbers years before they could possibly be justified and once they were justified the stock price would go right up again into nonsense territory

[Saline9515]

Tesla ipo'd at $1.6 bil. SpaceX is roughly x1000 that.

[wrsh07]

Right, I mean Tesla had generated lifetime revenue of 150mm, SpaceX did >18 billion last year. They have a monopoly on cheap space flight, just signed a big data center contract with a big user of compute (and built that data center quickly), have good internet service, etc etc

Seems worth at least 100x, and it doesn't seem surprising that it gets an extra 10x

[Saline9515]

Revenue is not a basis for valuation otherwise Walmart would be more valuable than Nvidia, Apple and Google combined. And I agree that SpaceX would be correctly valued at 180b.

Space TAM is not so large. Starlink ARPU is decreasing fast as well. And they rent the data center because Grok doesn't have enough usage, overall it's a bad usage of capital.

[Aperocky]

Even Mars becoming a state would not support that kind of valuation.

[supertroop]

No cfpa would claim #1. At retirement you are not balanced, you are in low risk funds or bonds.